|
        |
| |
| |
Public Affairs Update
Social sciences are key ingredient in nation’s science mission, congressman
believes . . . . Some Footnotes readers will recall (see May/June 2006, "On the Importance of Being Engaged in ASA") that Senator Kay Hutchison (TX) proposed 2006 legislation to eliminate
the social and behavioral science portfolio of the National Science Foundation.
It was a naïve but serious effort aimed ostensibly at enhancing the
nation’s competitiveness in science and technology. Her attempt, in Senate
bill 2802, was derailed through the efforts of a range of science advocates in
Washington and congressional allies on Capitol Hill, assisted greatly by Sen.
Frank Lautenberg (NJ) who introduced compromise language to restore a
rightful place for behavioral and social sciences within NSF. This summer,
in congressional deliberations on the America Competes Act (COMPETES),
Rep. Brian Baird (WA), Chairman of the House Science Committee’s Basic
Research and Education Subcommittee—convinced that last year’s Senate
compromise was not sufficiently robust in stating the relevance of the behavioral
and social sciences to America’s competitiveness, safety, and security
goals—single-handedly persuaded congressional colleagues to modify the
NSF authorizing bill. Among other changes, he included the “social sciences”
explicitly in a paragraph labeled “Priority Treatment” within the section of
the bill titled “Meeting Critical National Science Needs.” The bill, which the
President signed in August, appropriately now lists all the sciences as a priority.
The bill, which authorizes but does not actually appropriate funding,
would put NSF on a path to doubling its budget in ten years. ASA wrote to
Congressman Baird, a PhD psychologist, thanking him for his stalwart efforts
on behalf of the basic behavioral and social sciences and for his informed
support of science as a comprehensive, integrated endeavor.
Illicit drug use is down; recovery is up, among adolescents . . . . In spite
of encouraging national survey findings, federal officials are concerned over
rising abuse of prescription drugs in this population. The U.S. Substance
Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) announced
the following results this fall at the 18th annual National Alcohol and Drug
Addiction Recovery Month. The rate of adolescents (12-17 years) acknowledging
drug use in the past month dropped from 11.6 percent in 2002 to 9.8
percent in 2006, comparable to 2005’s 9.9 percent. This initial report from
the annual 2006 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) (of approximately
67,500 people) also indicates use of cigarettes decreased from
2002 to 2006 among 18-25 year-olds. However, the level of underage drinking
among 12-20 year-olds, remained unchanged since 2002, at 28.3 percent.
Among the most notable findings was that the level of current marijuana use
among youth aged 12-17 declined significantly from 8.2 percent in 2002 to 6.7
percent in 2006, and the decline was particularly pronounced for males. Of
particular concern is the growing misuse of prescription drugs. For example,
nonmedical use of prescription drugs increased from 5.4 percent in 2002 to
6.4 percent in 2006, due largely to pain relievers. The survey reveals that an
estimated 22.6 million persons (9.2 percent of the population ages 12 and
older) may have had either substance abuse or dependency problems in the
past year. Of these, 3.2 million were dependent on or abused both alcohol
and illicit drugs; 3.8 million were dependent on or abused illicit drugs but
not alcohol; and 15.6 million were dependent on or abused alcohol but not
illicit drugs. The survey also showed that 2.5 million received substance abuse
treatment at specialty facilities. The complete findings are at oas.samhsa.gov/NSDUHlatest.htm.
How does U.S. children’s well-being stack up to other industrialized
countries? . . . . A new international analysis compares the United States
to other industrialized, English-speaking countries (i.e., United Kingdom,
Canada, Australia, and New Zealand) to provide a more accurate baseline
for comparison (than other international assessments) of child well-being. In
addition to sharing similar linguistic and cultural heritages, these countries
have comparable political and economic cultures. The report assembles 19
key international indicators of child well-being within seven domains of
social life. Released in July, 2007 Child Well-Being Index (CWI) Special Focus
Report on International Comparisons finds that American children are generally
in the middle of the pack in terms of overall well-being; but there are serious
deficiencies in important areas. According to the primary author, Duke
University sociologist Kenneth Land, “No country outscores the United
States on all domains of child and youth well-being, but our comparison . . .
shows deficiencies in U.S. child well-being. This report highlights the need
for continuing public- and private-sector efforts to support and enhance the
well-being of children and youth living in households with limited economic
resources in the United States.” The report finds: (1) While the U.S. percentage
of households without an employed adult is lower, U.S. poverty rates
are higher. (2) Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom
have better health outcomes (e.g., infant mortality, overweight and obesity
rates). (3) Teen birth rates in Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, and
New Zealand are lower. (4) While the United States has a relatively high
proportion of young adults who complete high school and obtain baccalaureate
degrees, the proportion of children who attend preschool is lower in the
United States than in all countries except the United Kingdom. (5) 15-yearold
American students scored lower in math and reading than counterparts
in all comparison countries on international standardized tests, leading to
a last-place finish in the Educational Attainment domain. See www.fcdus.org/resources/resources_show.htm?doc_id=510642.
|
|