'Stop the clock': GOP, Dems come together to end Daylight Saving over health, economic risks
In 1957, rockabilly singer Bob Ehret repeated, "We've got to stop the clock, baby; to spend more time with you" — and in a Senate Commerce Committee hearing, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle strongly considered the benefits of doing so, in a way.
Chairman Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said Daylight Saving was grounded in good-faith efforts to reduce energy consumption, but that instead it has led to increased auto accidents in the dark, workplace issues and objections from the agriculture sector that relies on early-morning sunlight.
"We find ourselves adjusting our clocks… springing forward and falling back in the fall. For many Americans, this biannual ritual is a minor inconvenience… But when we take a closer look at the implications of changing the clocks, its impact on our economy, our health and our everyday lives, we can see that this practice is more than an annoyance," Cruz said.
"The idea was simple. Fewer hours of darkness meant less electricity consumption for lighting and heating."
Trump's Daylight Savings Plan
However, unlike the early 1900s, when the U.S. economy was heavily reliant on energy consumption tied to daylight hours, today's effects from sunrise and sunset timings are "de minimis," he said.
Read On The Fox News App
Cruz, along with Massachusetts neurology physician Dr. Karin Johnson, spoke about the health concerns associated with changing the time twice a year and with the permanence of Daylight Saving Time (DST), versus Standard Time.
"Research has shown that the abrupt shift in time, especially the spring transition when we lose an hour of sleep," Cruz said, as Johnson spoke about the effects on people's circadian rhythm, vascular system and sleep deprivation.
The panel also hosted an official from the National Golf Course Owners Association, as he and other lawmakers spoke of the increased revenue from evening tee times and other tourist activities only possible during daylight hours.
On the Democratic side, Sen. Lisa Blunt-Rochester of Delaware agreed that it was time to consider a "permanent time for our country."
She noted a bill from then-Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., to abolish DST stalled in the House.
"This body [then] took a harder look at how time changes work state-by-state," she said.
"What works in my home state of Delaware may not work in Washington state, but I know I speak for many Americans when I say it's time. It's time to figure this out."
'I Can't Sleep Because Of Racing Thoughts At Night — How Can I Stop Them?': Ask A Doctor
Witnesses to the hearing noted that it is indeed southern states like Florida and Texas where the negative effects of a permanent Daylight Saving Time would be most felt.
Sen. Edward Markey, D-Mass., spoke about his work shifting Daylight Saving Time twice to help assuage some of the issues that were brought up each time, including better guaranteeing trick-or-treating happens at worst at dusk.
Markey quipped that his decades-long work on this issue earned him the nickname "the Sun King."
"We need to stop the clock," Blunt-Rochester said. "We know that changing the clock disrupts sleep, which can lead to negative health outcomes. Several studies have noted issues with mood disturbances increase hospital admissions, and even heart attacks and strokes."
Lock the Clock movement founder Scott Yates testified about the flawed history of DST, noting a time during the 1970s energy crisis that the Nixon administration briefly made DST permanent.
Nixon signed the law in December 1973 while embroiled in Watergate — but it took effect the first week the following year — Jan. 6, 1974.
"So you can imagine, the worst Monday of the year already is the one after the holiday break where you have to go back to school and everything — to have an extra hour of sleep robbed away right before that. You can understand why it was so unpopular and why it was repealed," Yates said, noting that months later, Nixon resigned.
The burglary by the "Plumbers" at the Watergate Hotel also notably occurred during nighttime hours.
"So maybe — if we had more daylight, the Watergate break-in doesn't happen," Cruz quipped in response.
"And history would be different."Original article source: 'Stop the clock': GOP, Dems come together to end Daylight Saving over health, economic risks
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
39 minutes ago
- USA Today
See which U.S. cities report 'forever chemicals' in drinking water
See which U.S. cities report 'forever chemicals' in drinking water Water pouring from the faucets of at least 42 million Americans is contaminated with unacceptable levels of 'forever chemicals,' according to a USA TODAY analysis of records the Environmental Protection Agency released on June 2. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are a family of manmade chemicals engineered to be nearly indestructible. Studies have shown they can accumulate over time in human bodies, leading to certain cancers and other health complications. Over the past two years, the EPA has collected complete sets of test results from about 6,900 drinking water systems, with thousands more expected as the PFAS testing initiative continues another year. USA TODAY's analysis of these systems with complete results shows nearly a quarter of large water utilities serving at least 100,000 customers exceeded limits the EPA approved last year on two chemicals: PFOS and PFOA. Water systems in Fairfax County, Virginia, and San Juan, Puerto Rico – each serving over 1 million customers – have now joined the list of utilities with test results that averaged over the limits in the EPA's latest data. USA TODAY's analysis also shows that Tempe, Arizona, which provides water to over 165,000 people, has joined that list. Multiple test locations there failed to meet the EPA standards. PFOS at one sample site averaged 55 parts per trillion (ppt), several times higher than the acceptable limit of 4 ppt. Altogether, USA TODAY found 774 systems don't meet the limits for forever chemicals. These utilities will likely need to install advanced filtration systems or find alternative sources of drinking water by 2031. The deadline for systems to meet the water standards was originally set for 2029, but in May, the EPA proposed an extension and announced it intends to rescind limits on four other types of PFAS set under the Biden administration in 2024. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said the delay was to provide 'common-sense flexibility' to 'support water systems across the country, including small systems in rural communities, as they work to address these contaminants.' Industry groups representing water utilities have sued the EPA, alleging the agency did not follow the proper procedures when approving PFAS limits last year. Last month, Zeldin said rescinding the limits on the other four forever chemicals would ensure they 'follow the legal process laid out in the Safe Drinking Water Act.' The lawsuit has been on hold since February to allow time for the new administration to review the issues. On June 4, the hold was extended through July 21 'while the United States determines the most appropriate course of action for this litigation in light of EPA's decision to reconsider portions of the challenged rule.' Advocacy organizations have denounced the EPA's proposed changes on forever chemicals. Melanie Benesh, vice president of government affairs for the Environmental Working Group, described the move as a 'public health betrayal.' 'Communities have waited decades for protection – now the EPA is pulling the rug out,' Benesh said. 'Science is clear: PFAS are dangerous even in tiny amounts. The agency must protect all Americans, not just from two chemicals, but from the entire class of harmful PFAS.'
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Inside the MAGA vs. hawk battle to sway Trump on bombing Iran
An influential group of GOP hawks has launched a behind-the-scenes lobbying offensive pressing President Donald Trump to not only back off his administration's quest for a nuclear deal with Iran, but greenlight an attack on Tehran by Israel. The campaign is raising alarms among Trump and his allies, who have launched a counteroffensive to keep the president's diplomacy on track. During a private lunch with the president at the White House last Wednesday, conservative talk show host Mark Levin told Trump that Iran was days away from building a nuclear weapon, an argument Trump's own intelligence team has told the president is not accurate, according to an intelligence official as well as another Trump ally familiar with the matter. Levin urged Trump to allow the Israeli government to strike Iranian nuclear sites, which Trump has told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would torpedo the diplomacy. Levin has been waging a public war against Trump's longtime friend and special envoy leading talks, Steve Witkoff, who also attended the meeting. They were joined by GOP megadonor Ike Perlmutter, the onetime Marvel Entertainment executive who is friendly with Witkoff. On a separate front, MAGA loyalists have been warily eyeing Rupert Murdoch's papers, particularly the New York Post, as they've savaged Witkoff, suggesting at one point that he's a mouthpiece for Qatar. The allegations have infuriated some in Trump's inner circle, who see them as an effort to undercut the talks. Murdoch has, meanwhile, privately complained to confidants about Witkoff's effort, according to a person familiar with the matter. 'They're trying to push the president to make a decision that's not what he wants,' a senior administration official told POLITICO. This person, like others in this story, was granted anonymity to speak freely. 'There's clearly a lobby for war with Iran vs. those who are more aligned with the president, that know he is the one that has been able to bring them to the negotiating table.' The lobbying has triggered a coordinated effort to defend Trump and Witkoff's diplomatic posture. Hours after Levin's meeting with Trump, Tucker Carlson, who had clearly been alerted to the gathering by someone familiar with what happened, took to X to accuse Levin of trying to bully the U.S. into war. 'There is zero credible intelligence that suggests Iran is anywhere near building a bomb, or has plans to. None,' Carlson tweeted. 'So why is Mark Levin once again hyperventilating about weapons of mass destruction? To distract you from the real goal, which is regime change — young Americans heading back to the Middle East to topple yet another government.' The private lobbying and public sniping highlight a vast breach in the GOP over U.S. foreign policy just months into Trump's first term. While many hawkish members of the old guard have viewed Witkoff's diplomatic effort with skepticism, the more restrained wing of the party has been adamant about defusing tensions with Tehran. In the middle of the tug-of-war is Trump, who ran on a promise of ending what his followers see as endless U.S. foreign adventurism and war. Some Trump allies believe the president will stand his ground — and even predict the pressure tactics are starting to grate on him. 'Levin and Murdoch are all over Trump all the time — I actually think they hurt their case because I know Trump,' said one longtime Trump confidant. 'Once he's kind of made his mind up, you can come at it later from a different angle, but you keep pressing, he digs in.' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told POLITICO the president 'has always been willing to listen to a wide range of voices on every issue — but ultimately, he is the final decision maker.' 'With respect to Iran, President Trump has made his own opinion clear: he would like to pursue diplomacy and make a deal, but IF Iran makes a deal impossible, President Trump has other options on the table,' she added. Trump sounded a note of skepticism about a potential deal while speaking to reporters Monday afternoon. While noting that his administration will engage with Iran for their latest talks on Thursday, Trump said the Iranians are 'just asking for things that you cannot do.' 'They do not want to give up what they have to give up — you know what that is: They seek enrichment. We can't have enrichment,' he said. 'We want just the opposite. And so far they are not there. I hate to say that because the alternative is a very, very dire one.' While both camps have a tendency to frame their positions as binary choices — a deal or war, an attack on Iran's program or a guaranteed Iranian nuclear weapon — the reality is less clear. If the nuclear talks fail, that would increase the likelihood that the U.S., Israel or both would feel compelled to act militarily. But the U.S. could also more immediately look to ratchet up economic pressure on Tehran to see if it might eventually return to talks, a strategy some Republicans are already pushing privately. As for those favoring a strike on Iran's facilities, many military and nuclear experts say that U.S.-Israeli action would probably only temporarily set back Iran's program rather than completely destroy it. Other MAGA figures, from Charlie Kirk to activist Jack Posobiec, have used their public profiles to bolster the case for diplomacy. They're encouraging Trump to stick to his negotiations and resist what they fear could be an Israeli-led sleepwalk into war. Vice President JD Vance, perhaps the most powerful leader of the anti-war faction of the party — and who has close ties with many online MAGA influencers — has also weighed in. Just after Levin's meeting with Trump, he came to Witkoff's defense in a podcast with Theo Von. Witkoff recently gave Iran a proposal for a deal that would allow Tehran to enrich uranium at low levels but eventually become part of a regional enrichment consortium. Iran has made clear it will not abandon its domestic enrichment capability, while Trump has set that as a red line. That's left Witkoff to try to bridge the gap with a solution, which Iran has not yet formally responded to. 'It is a very creative proposal that allows both sides to claim a win,' a senior administration official said. Witkoff will meet with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi for a sixth round of talks on Friday or Sunday. Advocates for military action or ratcheting up significant pressure on Iran say this is the best opportunity in years to strike Iran after Israeli attacks weakened its regional proxies. Mark Dubowitz, chief executive of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tank and a fierce critic of Iran's government, said the public debate has weakened the perception that the U.S. would be prepared to strike or back Israel if necessary. 'Those who are advocating that there be no credible military threat are making it more likely there'll be a bad deal, and more likely that the Israelis will be forced to strike,' he said. Trump allies and administration officials wary of military action have been seeing stories in some conservative media that they privately discount as plants by hawks and other pro-military, Israel-aligned groups. The officials spent much of last week working to discredit a Fox News story about an Austrian intelligence agency report that suggested Iran has grand plans to develop nuclear weapons that will help it assert dominance in the region. The posturing also comes on the heels of the latest assessment by the U.N.'s nuclear energy watchdog, IAEA, which has concluded that Tehran has increased its stockpile of 'near-bomb uranium' over the past three months. That's given Tehran the ability to fuel 'roughly 10 weapons, up from around five or six' when Trump took office, according to the New York Times. U.S. intelligence has pegged Iran's so-called breakout time — the amount of time it needs to produce enough weapons grade material for a nuclear weapon — at one to two weeks, U.S. officials say. But officials also continue to assess that Iran has not made the decision to actively go for a nuclear weapon. If Iran were to pursue the bomb, experts and diplomats disagree how long it would take to weaponize it, ranging from a few months to over a year. There's one big wildcard in all of this: People on both sides of the debate aren't sure what Trump will do. One person noted that the president has been so firm in his beliefs that he fired Michael Waltz as national security adviser in part because he'd been coordinating with the Israelis for an Iran offensive. Still, even among those pressing for diplomacy, there is concern about the president's penchant for changing his mind depending on who he's last spoken to. There's a fear Trump — who has threatened to bomb Iran if they don't come to heel — could act on rhetoric many largely deem negotiating bravado. '[Trump is] very solid in what he wants and letting Witkoff do his thing,' said one person close to the talks. 'But depending on who he hears from, he may move a little bit.' Some of the hawks in and around the lobbying effort, meanwhile, say that Trump has made clear that he is prepared to use military force if necessary. Pursuing diplomacy at any cost, they say, is a misreading of what he wants. 'The good news is Donald Trump is … not an isolationist. He's bombed Yemen, he's taken out [IRGC leader Qasem] Soleimani and [ISIS leader Abu Bakr al] Baghdadi. He's done what he needs to do. But [isolationism] is a force that continues to try pressuring him,' Levin said during a recent episode. In some ways, the push and pull with Israel has been going on for months. Israel has been privately imploring the administration to join them to strike Iran's nuclear facilities. But Trump has headed off that pressure. When Ron Dermer, Israel's strategic affairs minister and a confidant of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, came to Washington in early May, Trump asked him to prevent Israel from attacking Iran while Trump was on his Middle East swing, according to one Trump ally and one U.S. official familiar with the conversations. The president stayed another attempt again in late May. Israeli officials have told the Trump administration that they believe they have a limited window to strike. Trump's decision to favor diplomacy over military action — at least for now — also highlights the growing rift between Washington and Israel. Trump's pro-Israel actions from his first term have given him cover from attacks from Netanyahu or others who would suggest he is not pro-Israel enough. Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and moved the U.S. embassy there, recognized Israeli sovereignty in the Golan Heights, and brokered the Abraham Accords, among other actions. But now the two close allies are at odds over Iran. Even before the dispute over strategy, Israelis have expressed disappointment in the U.S. decision to end its campaign on the Iran-backed Houthis without notifying the Jewish nation, and bypassing a visit to Israel on the president's Middle East swing. 'The president is not going to support war… But I'm telling you, these guys won't take no for an answer,' said a longtime Trump ally. 'This is why there's a breach in the Bibi-President Trump relationship. ... Israel isn't reading the room. The MAGA movement doesn't support military operations.'
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Why Are So Many Children Getting Long COVID?
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. It's been more than five years since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, although millions of Americans, including children, are still affected by it today. More than one million Americans died due to the virus, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), while many were floored by the infection for weeks or even months. Others developed long COVID, which is recognized as a collection of symptoms that last three months or longer after initial COVID symptoms appear. This can affect many systems in the body and result in a wide range of health complications and symptoms. File photo: a mother holds her daughter while she has a COVID-19 test done in a clinic in Washington. File photo: a mother holds her daughter while she has a COVID-19 test done in a clinic in Washington. Carolyn Kaster/AP A study by Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery (RECOVER) last year found that up to 5.8 million American children now have long COVID. The authors wrote that this means between 10 to 20 percent of children who tested positive with COVID-19 went on to develop the condition. Their findings suggest that long COVID may have surpassed asthma—which around 5 million youngsters have—as the most common chronic condition experienced by American children. However, experts told Newsweek that more detailed research is needed to determine the prevalence of the condition, and discussed why millions of children now have ongoing health complications and symptoms post-COVID infection. Prevalence of Long COVID in Children Children of all ages can develop long COVID and typical symptoms can vary between age groups. Poor appetite, sleep issues and respiratory symptoms such as a cough are usually common in infants, toddlers and preschool-aged children with the condition, while school-aged children are also likely to have neurological symptoms like trouble focusing, fear of specific things or feeling lightheaded, the medical journal site JAMA Network reported. Some children may also experience back or neck pain, headache, stomach pain, vomiting and even behavioral changes. Adolescents may also notice a change or loss in smell or taste and experience pain, fatigue-related symptoms or trouble with their memory, JAMA Network said. It is difficult to pin down exactly how common long COVID really is among those aged under 18 as "prevalence varies between studies due to different clinical definitions, follow-up period and survey methods used," Dr. Akiko Iwasaki, director of the Center for Infection and Immunity at the Yale School of Medicine, told Newsweek. However, she added that "the most robust studies" collectively suggest the number of children who get infected with COVID and then develop long COVID "is higher than the prevalence of asthma in children in the U.S." Also discussing the study, Dr. Lauren Grossman, a professor of medicine at Stanford University, told Newsweek: "The number of children under 18 with asthma ranges from 4.9 million to 6 million depending on the source so it's not an incorrect statement to say that there are more or at least the same number of children with asthma as there are with long COVID." Many children are also going "unrecognized and unsupported," Dr. Rachel Gross, a professor in the department of pediatrics at NYU Langone Health, told Newsweek. She added that this means "identifying long COVID in children, especially young children, can be difficult due to rapid developmental changes and communication limitations." However, Dr. Gerald Teague, a professor of pediatrics at the University of Virginia School of Medicine, said that "there are too few prospective studies to compare estimates of long COVID to asthma in children." "We need to come to consensus on how to precisely diagnose long COVID in children first," he told Newsweek, adding that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the federal government should "allocate more funding to antiviral research in children to help clear these confusing issues." Gross also said that the age differences in long COVID symptoms "support that a one-size fits all approach will likely not be sufficient to screen for, identify, and treat children with long COVID." Why Do So Many Children Have Long COVID? One reason long COVID continues to affect millions of American children could be related to vaccinations, according to Grossman. "As vaccinations help prevent long COVID and vaccinations were not available to pediatric patients until long after they were for adults, fewer children had protection," she said. She added that the first vaccines were given to adults in December 2020, while children aged 5 to 11 only received their first vaccination in October 2021. Teague also said that studies have found that the original COVID strain in 2020 was far more likely to result in patients developing long COVID, while more recent strains were "not as likely to be associated with symptoms." Few children being vaccinated amid the first, more symptom-inducing strain of the virus may therefore have contributed to the higher rates of long COVID. Child COVID vaccinations have also recently come into the spotlight as Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has been vocal in his distrust of the mRNA COVID vaccine, announced last month that the CDC will no longer recommend COVID vaccines for "healthy children and healthy pregnant women." Grossman added that Paxlovid, the antiviral medication used to treat COVID infection, was first authorized in December 2021, but only for those aged 12 and over, or those who weighed more than 88 lbs., meaning younger children did not have access to medication. It is important to note, however, that "the prevalence for long COVID in children appears to be just as high in adults," Iwasaki said. "This suggests that children are not immune to developing long COVID, and that their immune system is also susceptible to being derailed by the virus," she added. Iwasaki said that this could mean that COVID infection "might become persistent or trigger autoimmune diseases in children," and that there could be "other viral infections that happen during childhood that impact long COVID susceptibility." However, she said that more research is needed to better understand the underlying mechanisms of long COVID in youngsters. "We need more awareness so that parents and pediatricians can recognize the signs of long COVID in children better," Iwasaki said. "The relationship between children, their caregivers, and pediatricians is vital to identify and eventually treat this under-recognized condition," Gross said. Grossman said that establishing pediatric-specializing long COVID clinics was vital as currently there are "very few," and that promoting "full vaccination" was also important. While more robust studies are beginning to be done on the issue, it is still difficult to determine the overall impact and severity of long COVID on America's children.
