Jonathan Kantrowitz

The state of the science and engineering (S&E) enterprise in America is strong, yet its lead is slipping, according to data released by the National Science Board (NSB).

“The data begin to tell a worrisome story,” said Kei Koizumi, assistant director for federal research and development (R&D)in the President’s Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). Calling SEI 2010 a “State of the Union on science, technology, engineering and mathematics,” he noted that “U.S. dominance has eroded significantly.”

Over the past decade, R&D intensity–how much of a country’s economic activity or gross domestic product is expended on R&D–has grown considerably in Asia, while remaining steady in the U.S. Annual growth of R&D expenditures in the U.S. averaged 5 to 6 percent while in Asia, it has skyrocketed. In some Asian countries, R&D growth rate is two, three, even four, times that of the U.S:

In terms of R&D expenditures as a share of economic output, while Japan has surpassed the U.S. for quite some time, South Korea is now in the lead–ahead of the U.S. and Japan. And why does this matter? Investment in R&D is a major driver of innovation, which builds on new knowledge and technologies, contributes to national competitiveness and furthers social welfare. R&D expenditures indicate the priority given to advancing science and technology (S&T) relative to other national goals.

While the U.S. continues to lead the world in research publications, China has become the second most prolific contributor. China’s rapidly developing science base now produces 8 percent of the world’s research publications, up from its just 2 percent of the world’s share in 1995, when it ranked 14th.

Patents are another measure of valuable contributions to knowledge and inventions to societies. Inventors from around the globe seek patent protection in the U.S. U.S. patents awarded to foreign inventors offer a broad indication of the distribution of inventive activity around the world. While inventors in the U.S., the European Union (EU) and Japan produce almost all of these patents, and U.S. patenting by Chinese and Indian inventors remains modest, the number of patents earned by Asian inventors is on the rise, driven by activity in Taiwan and South Korea.

Connecticut’s move to get 16-year-olds out of adult courts and prisons is drawing praise locally and nationally. The first case affected by the new law illustrates exactly why advocates fought so hard for it.

The first 16-year-old whose processing changed because of the law was arrested on a domestic dispute. Had he gone to the adult system, his family would not have received the same level of counseling services – aimed at solving the problem that led to the arrest in the first place.

The state had been one of only three that prosecutes 16-year-olds as adults. Beginning January 1, only 16-year-olds accused of serious crimes went to adult court under the “Raise the Age” law. Minor offenses are now handled in the juvenile system, which has greater resources in mental health, education and other services proven to help young people succeed in their communities. Without an adult record, they’ll be eligible for more jobs, educational opportunities and military service.

“Connecticut just got safer,” said Ron Pinciaro, executive director of the Connecticut-based Coalition Against Gun Violence. “We know that youth who stay in the juvenile system are less likely to escalate into violence than those who are treated as adults.”

“An adult arrest has serious, life-long consequences,” said Southington Superintendent of Schools Joseph Erardi. “As someone who deals with adolescents every day, I know there is still time to steer a kid to the right path. The Raise the Age law allows us to hold young people accountable while creating a chance for them to turn things around.”

Connecticut’s move provides hope for youth in other states. “New York and North Carolina, sadly, continue to treat 16-year-olds as adults, despite a wealth of research showing that this increases recidivism,” said Liz Ryan, CEO of the Campaign for Youth Justice, a national advocacy group seeking to end the prosecution of children as adults. “Connecticut is being seen as a leader in basing juvenile justice policy on facts rather than slogans. This will inspire other states to do the same.”

Throughout the 1990s, states passed laws making it easier to prosecute children as adults. The results have been tragic, with youth in adult facilities at high risk of suicide and victimization. The Raise the Age campaign drew widespread support after a young man hung himself in a Cheshire facility run by adult corrections.

“Children’s advocates spent the last 20 years telling stories of how our policies of trying youth as adults has needlessly hurt and even killed young people,” said Sarah Bryer, executive director of the National Juvenile Justice Network. “I’d like to spend the next 20 years telling stories about kids who overcame a rocky start with the right help.”

Originally, the Raise the Age law would have moved 16- and 17-year-olds to juvenile jurisdiction on January 1. But because of state budget constraints, 17-year-olds will not make the move until 2012.

Representatives of nonpartisan election watchdog groups around the nation issued a last-minute ‘orange alert,’ warning that tomorrow’s Massachusetts special election to elect a successor to the late Senator Ted Kennedy is ripe for manipulation. The groups call on Secretary of State Galvin to take immediate extra security precautions for the Senate race, which has become a high-stakes national contest. Critical national initiatives such as health care reform and financial reform will be influenced by the results of this election.

Unprecedented amounts of out-of-state money has funded a media blitz, and recent seesawing polls — some highly questionable — show Republican Scott Brown and Democrat Martha Coakley now reported to be in a virtual toss-up.

Experts are concerned that with the electronic election system in use, its lack of transparency and ease of manipulation, the public has no basis for trust in the accuracy and integrity of the election results. Confidence in election outcome should be based on objective verification rather than government reassurance, particularly when voting systems with so many known vulnerabilities and so little ability for oversight are employed.

“Now is the time for Massachusetts state election officials to act. Now is the time for all citizens to act,” said Sally Castleman, Massachusetts voter and co-founder of Election Defense Alliance.

Members of election integrity organizations nationwide urge Secretary of State Galvin to take immediate steps to increase transparency for this electronically tabulated election.

Massachusetts elections are programmed and serviced by New England Diebold affiliate LHS Associates, a private company, located in Methuen, MA, which alone controls the trade secret software and memory cards holding all ballot and voting data. This data must be secured and held by Massachusetts election officials, experts say.

Secretary of State Galvin must immediately institute a policy and practice to ensure that public election officials and not LHS Associates maintain chain of custody over all ballots, voting machines, database files, and memory cards. Only through public possession and scrutiny of all election data can we ensure the integrity of election results.

Alert citizens can help defend against election shenanigans by volunteering as polling center watchdogs.

Election Integrity expert Brad Friedman has warned that the outcome will rely on the accuracy of votes tallied by the easily-hacked electronic Diebold/Premier optical scan voting machines, featured in the film Hacking Democracy.

Friedman, writing in the Gouverneur Times says, “The electronic voting systems used in Massachusetts are notoriously plagued with problems and vulnerabilities, and are in violation of federal voting system standards. Moreover, they are sold, programmed, and maintained by a company with a disturbing criminal background.”

Friedman notes with concern, “The machines and cards are often accessed by both election officials and the private vendors who program and maintain them.”

The candidates are urged not to concede the election or declare victory until election results can be verified and any bona fide election challenges resolved.

The organizations issuing the alert include:

Americans United for Democracy, Integrity, and Transparency in Elections, AZ http://audit-az.blogspot.com
Bev Harris, BlackBoxVoting.org, a national nonpartisan nonprofit elections
watchdog organization
Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots, Belmont, MA www.handcountedpaperballots.org
Coalition for Visible Ballots www.coalition4visibleballots.homestead.com
Florida Fair Elections www.floridafairelections.org/board.htm
Massachusetts Citizens for Voting Integrity www.handcountedpaperballots.org
PDA Board Chair Mimi Kennedy www.pdamerica.org
NH Fair Elections Committee www.democracyfornewhampshire.com
RecallVotingMachines.com
Velvet Revolution www.velvetrevolution.us
Where’s the Paper www.wheresthepaper.org

The FDA for the first time has expressed “some concern” about BPA:

Bisphenol A (BPA) is an industrial chemical that has been present in many hard plastic bottles and metal-based food and beverage cans since the 1960s.
Studies employing standardized toxicity tests have thus far supported the safety of current low levels of human exposure to BPA. However, on the basis of results from recent studies using novel approaches to test for subtle effects, both the National Toxicology Program at the National Institutes of Health and FDA have some concern about the potential effects of BPA on the brain, behavior, and prostate gland in fetuses, infants, and young children. In cooperation with the National Toxicology Program, FDA’s National Center for Toxicological Research is carrying out in-depth studies to answer key questions and clarify uncertainties about the risks of BPA.
In the interim:
FDA is taking reasonable steps to reduce human exposure to BPA in the food supply. These steps include:
supporting the industry’s actions to stop producing BPA-containing baby bottles and infant feeding cups for the U.S. market;
facilitating the development of alternatives to BPA for the linings of infant formula cans; and
supporting efforts to replace BPA or minimize BPA levels in other food can linings.
FDA is supporting a shift to a more robust regulatory framework for oversight of BPA.
FDA is seeking further public comment and external input on the science surrounding BPA.
FDA is also supporting recommendations from the Department of Health and Human Services for infant feeding and food preparation to reduce exposure to BPA.

The Washington Post has more on the story:

Reversing itself, FDA expresses concerns over health risks from BPA

The Food and Drug Administration has reversed its position on the safety of Bisphenol A, a chemical found in plastic bottles, soda cans, food containers and thousands of consumer goods, saying it now has concerns about health risks.

Growing scientific evidence has linked the chemical to a host of problems, including cancer, sexual dysfunction and heart disease. Federal officials said they are particularly concerned about BPA’s effect on the development of fetuses, infants and young children….

Regulators stopped short of banning the compound or even requiring manufacturers to label products containing BPA, saying that current data are not clear enough to support a legal crackdown. FDA officials also said they were hamstrung from dealing quickly with BPA by an outdated regulatory framework.

Sharfstein said the agency is conducting “targeted” studies of BPA, part of a two-year, $30 million effort by the administration to answer key questions about the chemical that will help determine what action, if any, is necessary to protect public health. The Obama administration pledged to take a “fresh look” at the chemical.

BPA, used to harden plastics, is so prevalent that more than 90 percent of the U.S. population has traces of it in its urine, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Researchers have found that BPA leaches from containers into food and beverages, even at cold temperatures.

The FDA’s announcement came after extensive talks between federal agencies and the White House about the best approach to an issue that has become a significant concern for consumers and the chemical industry.

One administration official privy to the talks said the FDA is in a quandary. “They have new evidence that makes them worried, but they don’t have enough proof to justify pulling the stuff, so what do you do?” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “You want to warn people, but you don’t want to create panic.”

The FDA had long maintained that BPA is safe, relying largely on two studies funded by the chemical industry. The agency was faulted by its own panel of independent science advisers in 2008, which said its position on BPA was scientifically flawed because it ignored more than 100 published studies by government scientists and university laboratories that raised health concerns about BPA. Recent data found health effects even at low doses of BPA — lower than the levels considered safe by the FDA.

Environmental health advocates responded to the announcement that Food and Drug Administration concurs with the National Toxicology Program’s assessment that bisphenol A is a chemical of concern:

Sarah Janssen, MD, PhD, staff scientist at Natural Resources Defense Council explains, “It’s a small step in the right direction that FDA is working with other federal agencies to acknowledge the health concern, but we believe there is sufficient evidence about the health risks of BPA to support regulatory action now. We know that low dose exposure to BPA at critical stages of development is linked to health effects later in life.”

Urvashi Rangan, PhD, toxicologist with Consumers Union, says, “Although food can linings is a relatively small use for BPA, it is a major source of exposure for most people and FDA needs to act as swiftly as possible to limit further exposure.”

Mia Davis, BPA Coordinator for Clean Water Action says, “Major baby bottle manufacturers and retailers are already moving away from BPA, but it remains on store shelves in some bottles, sippy cups and in most canned goods. We are all exposed to BPA and other hormone disruptors from a myriad of sources, and our government agencies should be acting in our best interest to eliminate these exposures.”

Bobbi Chase Wilding of Clean New York, pregnant with her second child says, “FDA’s announcement increases the concern for pregnant and nursing women, yet fails to protect us or our children. By not taking definitive action, FDA today put the burden back on overtaxed parents to seek safer products, rather than removing BPA-laced ones from the marketplace which would protect all of us.”

“It’s good that FDA registered concern about BPA and is advising parents to reduce children’s exposure,” said Janet Nudelman of the Breast Cancer Fund. “But the announcement doesn’t go far enough. Congress needs to step in and pass the bill currently under consideration, which would ban BPA from all food applications.”

Good and bad news in the latest health research reports.

I drink lots of green tea, which is good, and don’t smoke, which is even better:

Green tea fights lung cancer risk for smokers:

Among smokers and non-smokers, those who did not drink green tea had a 5.16-fold increased risk of lung cancer compared with those who drank at least one cup of green tea per day. Among smokers, those who did not drink green tea at all had a 12.71-fold increased risk of lung cancer compared with those who drank at least one cup of green tea per day.

I take Vitamin D which is good, but not calcium, which I guess I bad – I need to think about adding it to my regimen:

CALCIUM/VITAMIN D PREVENT FRACTURES:

Taking both calcium and vitamin D supplements on a daily basis reduces the risk of bone fractures, regardless of whether a person is young or old, male or female, or has had fractures in the past, a large study of nearly 70,000 patients from throughout the United States and Europe has found.

I am not particularly hairy which is good:

Wet and Hairy = Sunburn?

Water droplets held above human skin by body hair can cause sunburn This is because the hairs can hold the water droplets in focus above the surface, acting as a magnifying glass.

I don’t eat mangoes or pomegranates, which is too bad because they are both very good for you:

Mango fights colon, and breast cancer

Pomegranates fight breast cancer

Eating fruit, such as pomegranates, that contain anti-aromatase phytochemicals reduces the incidence of hormone-dependent breast cancer, according to results of a study published in the January issue of Cancer Prevention Research, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

I don’t drink much champagne, which I guess is too bad, but do drink plenty of red wine, which is very good (not the wine, but the health benefit) :

Champagne Is Good for Your Heart:

Dr Jeremy Spencer, from the Department of Food and Nutritional Sciences said: “Our research has shown that drinking around two glasses of champagne can have beneficial effects on the way blood vessels function, in a similar way to that observed with red wine. We always encourage a responsible approach to alcohol consumption, but the fact that drinking champagne has the potential to reduce the risks of suffering from cardiovascular diseases such as heart disease and stroke, is very exciting news.”

I don’t get much Vitamin C, which is too bad because it’s even better for you than we thought:

Vitamin C Is Good For You:

Famous for its antioxidant properties and role in tissue repair, vitamin C is touted as beneficial for illnesses ranging from the common cold to cancer and perhaps even for slowing the aging process. Now, a study uncovers an unexpected new role for this natural compound: facilitating the generation of embryonic-like stem cells from adult cells.

I don’t do yoga, which is bad, but my wife does, which is good:

YOGA REDUCES INFLAMMATION

Regularly practicing yoga exercises may lower a number of compounds in the blood and reduce the level of inflammation that normally rises because of both normal aging and stress, a new study has shown.

I’ve been cutting way back on my carbs, which has some benefit, although not what I hoped for, but I also kept fat consumption way down, so I’m not in as bad shape as some on low-carb diets:

Low Carb Diet Reduces Pain and Inflammation,

But Not Weight or Heart Risks:

Low-carb diets could be bad for the heart and are no more effective in weight loss than a diet that is high in carbs and low in fat, according to recent research. Some obese people may be considering taking on a low-carb lifestyle for the New Year, such as the popular Atkins diet. But recent research shows that a high-fat, low-carb way of eating could be bad for the heart – and, it is no more effective for losing weight than a diet low in fat and high in carbs.

A research team led by Dr. Steven Hunter of the Royal Victoria Hospital in Ireland examined a group of obese adults. Some of them were on a low-carb, high-fat diet and the others were eating a diet that was low in fat.

The average weight loss was the same for both groups, but over time, the people who ate a high-fat diet showed a clear increase in cardiovascular risk factors.

The Atkins diet allows high-fat meats, including bacon – and many people who try this diet will indulge in them. But Dr. Hunter explained that the risks outweigh the benefits. Patients don’t lose weight much faster than with other diets, and the high saturated fat content can put a toll on the heart. A better bet for the new year, says Dr. Hunter, is a diet low in fat, coupled with exercise.

I get plenty of exrercie, which is very good, but I also sit much too much, which is very, very bad:

Exercise = Reduced Cogntive Risk

Moderate physical activity performed in midlife or later appears to be associated with a reduced risk of mild cognitive impairment.

Exercise Is Good For You

Just three months of physical activity reaps heart health benefits for older adults with type 2 diabetes by improving the elasticity in their arteries — reducing risk of heart disease and stroke.

Sedentary TV time may cut life short

Study highlights:
Australian researchersfound that each hour spent in front of the television daily was associated with:
” an 11 percent increased risk of death from all causes,
” a 9 percent increased risk of cancer death; and
” an 18 percent increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD)-related death.
Compared with people who watched less than two hours of television daily, those who watched more than four hours a day had a 46 percent higher risk of death from all causes and an 80 percent increased risk for CVD-related death. This association held regardless of other independent and common cardiovascular disease risk factors, including smoking, high blood pressure, high blood cholesterol, unhealthy diet, excessive waist circumference, and leisure-time exercises.
While the study focused specifically on television watching, the findings suggest that any prolonged sedentary behavior, such as sitting at a desk or in front of a computer, may pose a risk to one’s health. The human body was designed to move, not sit for extended periods of time, said David Dunstan, Ph.D., the study’s lead author and professor and Head of the Physical Activity Laboratory in the Division of Metabolism and Obesity at the Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute in Victoria, Australia.

“What has happened is that a lot of the normal activities of daily living that involved standing up and moving the muscles in the body have been converted to sitting, “ Dunstan said. Technological, social, and economic changes mean that people dont move their muscles as much as they used to – consequently the levels of energy expenditure as people go about their lives continue to shrink. For many people, on a daily basis they simply shift from one chair to anotherfrom the chair in the car to the chair in the office to the chair in front of the television.

Dunstan said the findings apply not only to individuals who are overweight and obese, but also those who have a healthy weight. “Even if someone has a healthy body weight, sitting for long periods of time still has an unhealthy influence on their blood sugar and blood fats, “ he said.

Although the study was conducted in Australia, Dunstan said the findings are certainly applicable to Americans. Average daily television watching is approximately three hours in Australia and the United Kingdom, and up to eight hours in the United States, where two-thirds of all adults are either overweight or obese.

And finally, some notes that have nothing to do with my personal health:

Pregnant women should eat bacon and eggs:

If you’re pregnant and looking for an excuse to eat bacon and eggs, now you’ve got one: a new research study shows that choline plays a critical role in helping fetal brains develop regions associated with memory. Choline is found in meats, including pork, as well as chicken eggs.

Raising kids lowers blood pressure

A new Brigham Young University study found that parenthood is associated with lower blood pressure, particularly so among women.

According to Economic Policy Institute’s (EPI) estimates, a tax credit for firms equal to 15% of expanded payroll costs would lead them to hire an additional 2.8 million employees in 2010. Such a credit would have to be:

1. Wide-ranging. The tax credit should be designed to stimulate a wide range of jobs across economic sectors and across all kinds of firms, regardless of size or current profitability.

2. Temporary. It should be of limited duration to encourage job creation when the labor market is weakest and to limit the cost to the treasury.

3. Large. It should be large enough so that it will lead firms to hire new employees and cause a significant number of jobs to be created economy-wide.

4. Efficient. The tax credit should target new job creation as much as possible and not simply be a handout to businesses.

In line with these principles, EPI suggests a broad-based refundable tax credit for employers that expand their workforce in 2010 and 2011. In the first year the credit would be equal to 15% of the net increase in that portion of a firm’s payroll subject to Social Security taxes. In the second year the credit would drop to 10%. The reduction in the second year would encourage firms to hire sooner rather than later and would provide a significant incentive for expanded employment.

To ensure that the credit is most effective at stimulating new hiring and to ease implementation, the credit would be calculated as a percentage of the increment to firms’ Social Security payroll tax expenses over a base amount. EPI suggests using firms’ payrolls in the four quarters prior to enactment (adjusted for inflation) and calculating the tax credit based on the incremental increase in the expenses for payroll taxes paid. Employers already report Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes each quarter on IRS Form 941; adding a few lines to the form would allow a wage credit to be implemented relatively simply. The credit would be refundable, so even firms that are not profitable (and thus have no tax liability) would benefit. It would also be provided quarterly so it would help firms’ cash flow immediately after hiring.

The credit should be broad-based, extended to all private firms, nonprofit organizations, and state and local governments.

By basing the credit on total Social Security payroll taxes, it would also reward expansion of work hours as well as employment. And basing it on that portion of wages subject to Social Security payroll taxes ensures that the credit does not apply to wages increases for very high wage earners.

Impact

The job creation tax credit as outlined above would have a significant impact on job creation. Using estimates of how wage costs influence employer hiring, EPI calculates that the credit would lead to the creation of 1.4 to 2.8 million new jobs in the first year and slightly less in the following year as the tax credit is reduced.

The cost of the program is relatively modest. The initial revenue loss would immediately be limited due to offsetting increases in revenue from corporate tax receipts and individual tax payments. EPI estimates the gross revenue cost to be between $71 billion and $80 billion in the first year and between $62 billion and $67 billion in the second. However, the total cost to the government would be significantly less, since greater employment also means less spending on social safety net programs like unemployment insurance, health care, and nutrition assistance, and because some revenue would be recouped through higher corporate receipts. When these savings are included, EPI estimates a total cost of between $13 billion and $37 billion in the first year and between $14 billion and $36 billion in the second.

All told, the job creation tax credit would be a cost-effective way to create jobs. Factoring in the revenue loss from jobs that would have been created anyway, the cost would be between $4,700 and $26,300 per net new job created in the first year. This compares favorably to other means of generating jobs and is certainly more favorable than other business tax breaks, which typically have a low “bang-for-the buck” in terms of job creation.

Further Reading: The Job Creation Tax Credit

The Job Creation Tax Credit–Dismal projections for employment call for a quick, efficient, and effective response by Timothy Bartik and John Bishop (Oct. 20, 2009 / Briefing Paper #248)

Complementing Recovery Policies With a Jobs Creation Tax Credit (by Timothy Bartik and John Bishop (Oct. 20, 2009 / Policy Memo #250)

State-by-state projections put third-quarter unemployment above 20% among African Americans in five states; above 12% for Hispanics in nine states including Connecticut

As the nation braces for rising unemployment, which forecasters say will reach 10.7% in the third quarter of this year, a new forecast shows even grimmer times ahead for the nation’s African Americans and Hispanics.

In “Downcast Unemployment Forecast,” Economic Policy Institute Policy Analyst Kai Filion reports that unemployment inequality between whites and minorities, already wide at the start of the recession, has grown dramatically and will continue to expand even further as unemployment continues to rise. Among the consequences Filion predicts is a staggering poverty rate of 50% for African American children. His research offers a state-by-state look at the fast-rising unemployment among African Americans and Hispanics, expected to reach 17.2% among blacks and 13.9% among Hispanics nationally in the third quarter of the year. Both groups are expected to reach much higher rates in many states, however. Key findings and projections include:

• From the start of the recession to quarter three of 2010, white unemployment will have grown 5.0 percentage points, while the unemployment rate has increased much faster for blacks and Hispanics, which are expected to show recession-wide rises of 8.6 and 7.9 percentage points, respectively.

• In five states – Alabama, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, and South Carolina – African American unemployment will exceed 20% in the third quarter, with the highest rate of 27% projected in Michigan.

• In nine states – Arizona, California, Connecticut, Florida, Nevada, New Jersey, and New York – Hispanic unemployment will exceed 12%, with the highest level of 22.2% expected in Nevada, followed by California at 17.6%.

• The greatest growth in the white-black unemployment gap is predicted for Alabama, where unemployment will have grown 6.0 percentage points among whites and 15.2 points among blacks.

• A similar analysis between whites and Hispanics shows that the fastest-rising inequality is in Nevada, where the rise in unemployment for Hispanics will be about twice as fast as for whites by the third quarter – an increase of 7.3 percentage points among whites and 15.5 among Hispanics.

• The gender gap in unemployment is now the largest on record (since 1948 when these data were first collected). Nationally unemployment will climb to 11.7% among all men by the third quarter and to 9.7% among women. Gender disparities, too, vary by state, with the widest gap projected for Michigan of 20.0% unemployment for men versus 13.8% for women.

Even worse is the fact that the unemployment rate does not fully capture the extent of the jobs crisis, since millions of Americans have given up looking for work or cannot find the amount of work they need. This large group of discouraged and “involuntary part-time” workers is more accurately counted in the underemployment rate, which stood at 17.3% in December, and is much higher for black and Hispanic workers.

This image from EPI’s Economy Track shows the huge disparity in underemployment by race. While white underemployment has more than doubled over the course of the recession to 14.6%, underemployment is now 24.3% for black workers and 25.1% for Hispanic workers: A staggering one in four of these minority workers already cannot find the amount of work they want, and as described above, this is likely only to get worse.

Underemployment counts three groups of workers: The unemployed; involuntary part-time workers who want full-time work but have had to settle for part-time hours; and workers described as “marginally attached,” who want to work and are available to work but have given up actively looking. The ranks of the marginally attached typically increase during economic downturns as slim job prospects lead more of the unemployed to give up looking.

The underemployment rate is an important indicator of the health of the job market and the overall economy that is not fully reflected in the official unemployment number. When large numbers of workers are underemployed, it means employers may gradually increase their hours before they bring on additional full-time hires. And since workers who are underemployed have little if any discretionary income, high underemployment can limit the spending needed for a robust economic recovery.

These sobering data show us that the nation must do more to address the ongoing human tragedy brought on by this recession. There is no reason why we should tolerate such outcomes – elected officials can and must put millions of Americans back to work with bold, targeted job creation policies.

Vicki Kennedy:

Dear Friend,

Throughout my husband Ted’s life, you were always there for him, for me and for the entire Kennedy family. We are tremendously grateful for your friendship and support in the past, and we ask you to stand with us now to support Martha Coakley in the crucial race to fill Ted’s remaining term.

The importance of having a voice and a vote that you can count on in Washington has never been more evident than during this ongoing health care debate. And we’re going to need every vote again.

Ted fought for national health care reform for 40 years. He believed that every American deserved their chance at the American dream, but that as long as an illness or preexisting condition could bankrupt an American family, that great goal could never become a reality. We need Martha Coakley to continue our shared fight for national health reform, to reduce costs for businesses and families and increase coverage in Massachusetts and throughout this country. This race will be very close and we need you to get us to victory.

We have just 6 days to do the hard work of electing Martha Coakley so that we can continue the agenda that Ted made the fight of his life – reforming health care, ensuring equality and justice for all, protecting our seniors, and rebuilding our economy to allow everyone to prosper. That fight for working families cannot stop – not now, not when so much is at stake for Massachusetts and America. And that’s why I’m asking you to ensure that we are victorious this Tuesday.

Stand with me and support Martha Coakley by making a contribution of $35, $50, or whatever you can do today. My husband fought all his life to keep moving this nation forward — now we must make it the fight of ours.

Chris Dodd:

Dear Jonathan,

Ted Kennedy worked tirelessly to lift Americans out of poverty, advance the cause of civil rights, and provide opportunity for all. This Tuesday, the voters of Massachusetts will decide who fills Ted’s seat and at the same time will decide the fate of an agenda that Ted made the fight of his life.

Democrat Martha Coakley will be a great U.S. Senator who will honor Ted’s legacy and continue his agenda. But first, she needs our help. Please read the special message below from Ted’s wife Vicki and please make a contribution.

Let’s do it for Ted: Contribute to Martha Coakley today.

Ted Kennedy Jr.:

My father was a hero to me, not just because he was a great Dad,
but also because of what he fought for every day — an economy that
worked for all, a health care system that didn’t deny coverage or
bankrupt families or businesses, and a fair and just society that
allowed everyone to achieve their dreams. These are the very values
that connect us, and that are at stake in this election.

But my father’s legacy goes far beyond these issues. Just as he
was always there for me, he was always there for the people of
Massachusetts. Now it’s time that we are all there for him and all
that he stood for. Martha Coakley’s race gets closer by the day and
today, we must work harder than ever to keep this seat in Democratic
hands so that we can continue our shared fight for working families.
Will you ensure that my father’s hard work continues?…

Without Martha Coakley in the Senate many of the things we’ve
worked so hard to achieve are in danger, including my father’s 40 year
fight to pass real, comprehensive health care.

At this point, it’s unclear how Dems could portray the sakes as being
any higher. Now Obama’s entire agenda, Ted Kennedy’s life’s work, and
perhaps even his continued happiness in his resting place, are all on
the line in this one election

And in a sense, this isn’t really that much of an exaggeration! If
this can’t turn Dems out, nothing will.