The Daytona News-Journal reported earlier this week:

Prepping 17-year-olds for the privileges and responsibilities of voting in a democracy is nothing new for civics teachers, but when Jill Cicciarelli organized a drive at the start of the school year to get students pre-registered, she ran afoul of Florida’s new and controversial election law.

…

Cicciarelli hadn’t registered with the state before beginning the registration drive. And she didn’t submit the forms to the elections office on time.

In the absence of willful fraud or someone’s voting rights being denied, it seems unlikely she would face a fine. Since the law took effect in July, the state Division of Elections has issued only warnings. No incident has been turned over to the attorney general’s office for enforcement, said Chris Cate, a spokesman with the secretary of state’s office.

Opponents of Florida’s voting laws say that Cicciarelli’s situation is an example of the effect the new laws will have on voter participation — and the youth vote, in particular.

Like other third party groups that used to register voters before the laws were enacted, some high schools might also seize the practice of registering voters altogether. Groups such as SAVE Dade in Miami stopped registering voters because of the steep fines involved.

Estelle Rogers, the director of advocacy with Project Vote, tells The Florida Independent that if high schools were to stop preregistering 16- and 17-year-olds because of the new laws, it would be a huge step back for the state. She calls Florida’s preregistration program a “great asset” to the state.

According to the group’s website, Project Vote is a “national nonpartisan, nonprofit 501(c)(3) that works to empower, educate, and mobilize low-income, minority, youth, and other marginalized and under-represented voters.” Project Vote is one of the many groups intervening in Florida’s court case seeking preclearance of the controversial voting changes passed by the legislature. The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida is also challenging the law.

Rogers says that preregistration programs “have been shown to get young people,” a demographic that is notorious for low turnout in elections, ”enthusiastic about voting.”

“Having these rules get in the way is counterproductive and wrong-headed,” she says.

According to a report on Florida’s and Hawaii’s voter preregistration programs compiled by Dr. Michael P. McDonald, an associate professor at George Mason University, “preregistration is recommended to be best implemented as a component of a broader program of student civic education and student poll worker recruitment.” The report was funded through the Pew Charitable Trust Making Voting Work Project.

The report found that Florida preregistration among 17-year-olds from 1992 to 2008 rose from 10,000 to 80,000 as the state pushed forward its preregistration program.

According to a report (.pdf) from Project Vote, young people “who preregistered were more likely to turn out to vote than those who registered after turning 18 years old.” The group also reported that “the turnout increase was highest among African-American youth.”

Another 2010 report (.pdf) from Project Vote says that “Florida county-level Supervisors of Elections have deemed current student voter registration and education programs in their counties ‘tremendously effective’ in increasing voter registration and turnout.”

That same 2010 report shows that when schools, in particular, play a big role in preregistration the program is even more effective.

According to the report:

The Miami-Dade Supervisor of Elections Office started performing school voter registration drives more than 20 years ago. In 2004, the Miami-Dade Elections office reached out to more than 20 local high schools, and these outreach efforts continue. They did this by forming a strong relationship with the Miami-Dade School Board. Due to that relationship, last year, the Miami-Dade Elections Office was able to collect roughly 12,000 new voter registration forms from high school students.

Project Vote’s 2010 report explains that young people have been severely underrepresented in the voting electorate.

According to the report:

• As of November 2008, U.S. citizens 18- to 29-years old were registered to vote at a rate 10 percentage points lower than the general voting-eligible population.
• In the 2008 election, U.S. citizens aged 18 to 29 turned out to vote at a rate 13 percentage points lower than the general voting-eligible population.
• Registration and voting rates are much lower for 18-year-olds than the general voting-eligible population. In November 2008, the registration rate was 22 percentage points lower and the voting rate was 21 percentage points lower.

Rogers says that Cicciarelli’s situation “is a good example of someone getting hurt from the new law,” and it provides interesting insight into concrete impacts of it.

U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., wrote a letter to Gov. Rick Scott criticizing the law.

“After this incident with the teacher, can anyone actually say we aren’t taking a step backwards in Florida when it comes to protecting one of our most fundamental rights?” Nelson asked in his letter to Scott. “I hope that you and every Floridian, regardless of political party, will stop and re-examine this controversial law.”

Read McDonald’s report on preregistration for yourself:

Preregistration_Report_2_

The data tells the story of implementation on a wide-scale. The number of states dismissing teachers based on evaluation results is now at 18 plus the District of Columbia. Twenty-four states and the District of Columbia demand annual evaluations of instructors (an increase of nine from just two years ago). But in perhaps the greatest indicator that how teachers are rated is becoming a priority for states, the study found that 32 states and DC have made changes to their teacher evaluation policy since 2008.

During a conference call with reporters yesterday, Sandi Jacobs, Vice President at NCTQ, said the move towards greater teacher oversight is “taking big leaps forward even if there are some unanswered questions.”

NCTQ is a non-profit research group that advocates for increased teacher evaluation and accountability.

The report indicates that while the federal Race to the Top initiative developed by the Obama administration led to “unprecedented action among the states to secure a share of $4 billion … A significant portion of the competition focused on state efforts to improve teacher and principal effectiveness based on performance.”

But Jacobs also told reporters state activity in improving teacher evaluation systems continued at a clip even after the RTT money ran out, suggesting to her the issue is becoming a priority even without immediate cash incentives.

Interestingly, some RTT-winning states were not exemplified in the report. Hawaii was singled out for having “little or no legislative or regulatory changes to show for its promises regarding great teachers and leaders.”

The report also singled out Massachusetts, another RTT state. The researchers explain: “Notably, the state’s final regulations (unlike the drafts leading up to the final) removed language requiring that the student performance measures be a significant factor in teacher evaluations.”

On teacher evaluations, NCTQ supports a use of several measures to assess teachers. Not surprisingly, the value-added method, which is based on gauging teacher performance on how well students do on standardized tests year to year, is touted. And while value-added data lacks sophistication today, it shouldn’t be discounted, write the authors. They cite previous research that replacing the “lowest performing 8 percent of teachers with an average teacher” would move the U.S. along in international rankings for math and science performance. However, the authors stressed teacher performance should be assessed through high-quality classroom observations, as well.

Nor should states wait before evaluation systems are seamless. The authors write, “Are emerging teacher effectiveness measures perfect? No. But they are a marked improvement on evaluation systems that find 99 percent of teachers effective with little attention to a teacher’s impact on students and offer little meaningful information on teachers’ strengths, weaknesses and professional development needs.”

How often a teacher is assessed wins a state points with NCTQ.

Jacobs spoke favorably of DC Public Schools–teachers are evaluated five times during the year through the district’s IMPACT program. 14 other states require districts to conduct evaluations of all teachers. The report also recommends a minimum probationary period for all new teachers, set at four years.

Jacobs was then asked by reporters whether NCTQ’s emphasis on state involvement might pre-empt the actions of local decision makers. Since the effort for increased evaluation measures is relatively new, she said districts likely need the help setting up effective systems.

The phone session also included Jane Hannaway, vice president of the American Institutes of Research and director of the National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research, who offered her input on the state of evaluation systems today. She opposes scaling down end of year exams, as some states like North Carolina decided to do. She also feels teachers want to know how their performance measures up, especially in schools educating high-needs or low-income students.

“Human nature,” Hannaway said, moves individuals who are not succeeding in a situation to “try to get out of them.”

Arizona and Hawaii are currently waiting for federal approval of their plans to cut hospital coverage in their plans, much like Florida already has.

“Advocates for the poor and hospital executives say the moves will restrict patients’ access to care, force hospitals to absorb more costs and lead to higher charges for privately insured patients,” Kaiser/USA Today reports. “States defend the actions as a way to balance budgets hammered by the economic downturn and the end of billions of dollars in federal stimulus funding this summer – funds that had helped prop up Medicaid, the state-federal health insurance program for the poor.”

Florida is already among the list of states that have limited hospital coverage for Medicaid recipients in an effort to cut costs. The state’s Mediciad program currently only covers 45 days in a hospital for its beneficiaries.

Last week, acting Medicaid director Justin Senior told a Florida House health care committee that the state “could reduce home health visits for Medicaid beneficiaries and slash the amount of inpatient hospital care the program covers,” The News Service of Florida reported.

Senior said the state could limit emergency room visits to a maximum of 12 a year for each Medicaid recipient, which he said could save the state $12.2 million.

State Rep. Janet Cruz, D-Tampa, raised concerns for terminally ill patients who typically need more hospital visits. However, other members of the panel were “receptive” to the idea, the News Service reported:

Chairman Matt Hudson, R-Naples, said such a move could drive people to get treatment from primary-care doctors instead of emergency rooms, which could improve their health care.

Rep. John Wood, R-Winter Haven, appeared miffed that some Medicaid beneficiaries might go to the emergency room more than once a month, calling it “unacceptable.”

“If we’re allowing that type of behavior, shame on us,” Wood said.

Health advocates for low-income people are among those opposed to plans by states to limit hospital coverage for Medicaid patients.

Kaiser and USA Today report:

In Alabama, which has had a 16-day limit for more than decade, hospitals have billed patients for days not covered by Medicaid, said Larry Gardella, director of advocacy at Legal Services Alabama. Because poor patients often are unable to pay, the hospitals typically must pick up the cost, he said.

Another problem: Patients may also delay seeking elective services if they’ve already reached the coverage limit, Gardella said.

The state Legislature made significant cuts to the Florida program in the past year. Hospital coverage has been just one of the services that has been limited for Medicaid beneficiaries as the state aims to cut costs.

Presently, the Washington Post reports that the resolution has 24 supporters in the Senate, and if those 24 maintain their commitment to passing the bill, it will have just enough votes for passage; there are 47 state senators in Maryland. Should that happen, the Democrat-controlled House of Delegates is expected to pass the bill, and Gov. Martin O’Malley has already promised to sign it into law if it makes it to his desk. If SB 116 passes, Maryland will become the sixth state (and seventh jurisdiction overall, including D.C.) in which same-sex marriage is legal.

A similar bill has been drafted in Washington state and has quickly been gathering co-sponsors. It is currently in the Washington House Judiciary Committee, although it shares a slate with a competing bill that would amend the Washington constitution to define marriage as being between a man and woman.

Indeed, not all progress in legislatures across the country is toward legalizing marriage rights for all citizens. Of the five states in which same-sex marriage is currently legal, two are considering rolling back the law and instituting same-sex marriage bans. Iowa’s House of Representatives passed a resolution at the end of January that would allow the public to vote on banning same-sex marriage. Though Democrats outnumber Republicans in the Iowa Senate 26 to 24, Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal is concerned enough about the bill’s chances that he hopes to block a Senate vote on the resolution altogether. Iowa’s House and Senate would have to approve the measure in two consecutive General Assemblies — which are two years apiece — before it could be put to referendum.

Meanwhile, Republican legislators in New Hampshire have proposed three separate bills that would repeal the state’s same sex marriage law. The House Judiciary Committee will hold public hearings this week to determine whether any of the bills will be put to the floor for a vote. Although Republicans in the state netted massive wins in the November elections, public opinion polls show that a majority of New Hampshirites oppose the repeal of same-sex marriage.

The battleground over same-sex marriage of course does not end with those states. The Indiana House on Tuesday passed a ban on gay marriage, an action that appears redundant at first glance, as Indiana already made gay marriage illegal in 2005. However, the new bill extends not only to marriage, but would insert language into Indiana’s constitution to deny legal rights to anything “substantially similar” to marriage. Constitutional amendments in Indiana must be voted on in two separate legislative sessions and then approved in a public vote.

Bridging the gap between outright bans and marriage rights for all are the civil unions bills currently being debated in several legislatures across the country. Although supporters are struggling to pass civil unions bills in Colorado and Rhode Island, a Hawaii bill approving civil unions has passed a House vote and, following a one-day delay, is scheduled for a final vote in the Senate today. The Senate overwhelmingly passed an earlier version of the bill, and Gov. Neil Abercrombie (D) has pledged to sign it into law.

Correction: This article originally reported that to overrule a constitutional amendment in Iowa, the legislature must approve a measure two consecutive years before it could be put to referendum. Actually, the legislature must approve of a measure two consecutive General Assembly sessions, which are two years each. The story has been amended.

Bloomberg’s Margaret Carlson notes, “I called to get a statement on Egypt from Minnesota Representative and House Tea Party Caucus founder Michele Bachmann and was told by her press secretary that, in spite of numerous requests, she wouldn’t be giving any interviews this week while she concentrates on district work.”

Bachmann was in Hawaii on Wednesday for a lunchtime fundraiser with the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii.

Over the weekend, ABC reports that Bachmann will attend a kickoff for Rehberg’s campaign for U.S. Senate. Previously, the Minnesota Independent reported on the trip which will also include a fundraiser for the local Republican party.

And Bachmann’s office confirmed to CNN that she will be visiting that state later in the month to raise money for Republicans.

Senate candidate Alvin Greene’s job-creation idea is to make action figures of himself.

Michele Bachmann’s challenger raises $910,000 in the second quarter.

Arizona’s immigration law could derail the 28th annual conference of border governors.

Hawaii’s governor vetoes a bill to allow civil unions.

Obama might be losing support from independent voters.

Nate Silver guesses that LeBron James will either stay in Cleveland or join the Knicks.

“Generally I don’t think it’s any different than the rest of the country, which votes incumbents in most of time,” said Neal Milner, a political science professor at the University of Hawaii. “I think what’s important about Hawaii is not incumbency, it’s how strong it is for the Democrats.”

Djou won May 22 with only 39.4 percent of the vote, while his two Democratic opponents split a combined 58.4 percent. The district he now represents, which mainly covers the Honolulu metropolitan area, is overwhelmingly Democratic — Obama bested McCain here 70-28 percent. Before Saturday, the district had also not previously elected a Republican since 1988, when Pat Saiki won what would be her only re-election campaign. Djou has history on his side: In the more than 50 years since Hawaii became the 50th state, its voters have never voted out an incumbent member of its congressional delegation. But before his election, just two of those incumbents were Republicans: Saiki and Sen. Hiram Fong.

While voters have soured nationally on incumbents, even in their own districts, Hawaiians have somewhat bucked the trend. In a poll released March 26, Rasmussen Reports found that 51 percent of state voters felt their local representative deserved re-election, while 28 did not. (The broader meaning of that poll, though, is dubious, since at the time of its release, Hawaii had only one representative in Congress, the popular Mazie Hirono.) They were evenly divided about incumbents nationally — 38 percent said it was better for most incumbents to be re-elected while 37 percent felt most incumbents should be defeated.

A national Rasmussen poll released February 9 — the poll released closest to the Hawaii one — showed a far more anti-incumbent electorate. Just 38 percent of voters thought their local representative deserved re-election, while 39 percent did not. Sixty-three percent felt it was better for most incumbents to lose re-election, while 19 percent disagreed.

The dynamics that have affected politics in the continental United States over the past year — particularly the emergence of the Tea Party movement — have not influenced Hawaii’s races to the same degree, Milner said.

“We haven’t had the degree of outside anger and anti-incumbency pressure that you see elsewhere,” he said. “I’m still a little bit skeptical about how much that’s going to make a difference by the time November rolls around nationally, but right now Hawaii doesn’t have that same kind of dynamic.”

That may change now, as the national parties appear poised to do battle over Djou’s seat.

“The national parties don’t even send people out here for the presidential elections,” Milner said. “It’s not worth the resources generally because they’re not close elections. So this really is different, and I think it’s going to change the nature of the campaign just since the National Republican Congressional Committee already did a lot of strategizing to affect the race between the two Democrats. This is not something that I’ve ever seen.”

While the state remains largely Democratic, Milner said, Djou has a chance of winning a full term if he runs the right kind of race.

“Djou’s a good campaigner,” Milner said. “I think he’s got options. None of them are particularly good, but they’re about as good as you’re going to get for a minority party there. One option is to try to mobilize the anger and get the independents to vote Republican. Another is to argue in ways that bring other left-leaning independents over to his party. The Republican base is small enough that he can’t rely on that, so he’s got to figure out other things. So one of the things is to see if he can mobilize some of that anger. But he’s not that kind of guy.”

The Democratic primary campaign continues to be nasty as tensions persist between former Rep. Ed Case and Sen. Daniel Inouye, who strongly backed state Senate President Colleen Hanabusa’s candidacy in the special election. If the Democrats remain divided up to the Sept. 18 primary, Djou may be able to exploit their divisions again, Milner said.

“The best thing Djou may have going for him is all the antagonism that the Democratic primary may create,” he said. “That may move independent voters, who already lean a little more to the right nationally than they did two years ago, into Djou’s camp. But he’s got a problem because of the numbers.”

Oh yeah, one other thing: This is Barack Obama’s birthplace.

So why are Democrats now in danger of losing this seat? Well, it’s really a perfect storm situation for Republicans:

1. It’s a special election. There’s much more room for the unexpected in a special election. In this case, voters will be asked to vote by mail next month to choose a successor to Democrat Neil Abercrombie, who resigned to pursue his gubernatorial bid.

2. The ballot features 14 candidates of all parties on a single ballot. This means that several Democrats could split Democratic support to such a degree that the top Republican actually emerges with the single largest vote share. In fact, two strong Democrats, former Rep. Ed Case and state Sen. Colleen Hanabusa, are both seeking their party’s nomination, in addition to many other candidates of both parties.

3. The Republicans have one strong candidate. Republicans made clear at the start of this cycle that they were going to support Honolulu City Councilman Charles Djou for the seat, and the party coalesced behind him, pooling its resources. Mitt Romney is among the GOP figures supporting Djou.

4. Democratic infighting. The Democrats are not only splitting the vote, their supporters are turning on each other. David Dayen over at Firedoglake writes that the AFL-CIO has dropped mailers in support of Hanabusa that bash Case.

The DCCC dropped more than $47,000 there last week opposing Djou. I wonder how much more money this race will sap from the parties. And once this special election ends, it’s not even over. There is a regularly scheduled election this year (for which Djou, Hanabusa and Case have filed) to choose a full-term successor who will begin his or her term in January 2011.

Although Djou said he would have voted against the bill, he stopped short of saying he would join GOP efforts to repeal it.

“I think if we do not dramatically reform it and introduce a number of reforms … then yes, we do need to repeal,” Djou said. “But let’s try to work on dramatic reform first.”

Another report on the candidate forum confirms this — Djou wants to look at reform first, and repeal it if and when Democrats refuse to accept more GOP ideas. Djou isn’t exactly pounding the table about this issue.

*He’s facing two credible Democrats in a winner-take-all race, raising the possibility that he could win with a plurality of the vote in a split field.

Now that the unemployment rate is 6.9 percent, and people are applying for unemployment benefits at a record pace, Hawaii has a problem: a state law that triggers an automatic tax increase to cover shortfalls in the unemployment system. And whatever money Hawaii’s employers saved during the boom employment times, they’re about to have to repay in spades. The per-employee tax to fund unemployment benefits will go from $90 to $1,070 per worker this year — absent legislative intervention — to cover systemic shortfalls.

Lingle is now calling for lawmakers to limit the per-employee tax increase to 60 percent, a $54-per-employee increase. Does anyone think that employers saved enough on the tax cut from 2007 to 2009 to make up for the current need for a massive increase?

But don’t hold your breathe waiting for Republicans to start screaming about how massive tax reductions led to larger deficits in the end. These days, only spending can lead to deficits.