
High schools starting at 8:30 a.m.? Florida legislators may kill that plan before it kicks in
Starting Florida's public high schools no earlier than 8:30 a.m. may be a plan that gets scrapped before it is ever implemented.
Two years ago, Florida approved the start time rule to begin in the 2026-27 school year, setting up a major shift for the state's public high schools, which on average ring the first bell at 7:45 a.m. and even earlier on most Central Florida campuses.
But now the Florida Legislature has plans to reverse the law it enacted two years ago. A Senate education committee approved deleting the 2023 rule in a 6-to-1 vote Monday afternoon.
The earlier law made sense, given numerous studies have shown students do better when high schools don't start classes as early as they do in Florida, several senators said.
But it ran into 'practical realities,' mostly that it would be 'cost prohibitive,' said Sen. Jennifer Bradley, a Clay County Republican who is sponsoring this year's law.
Most districts use the same buses for all their students, staggering start times for their elementary, middle and high schools. If they pushed back high school start times, they'd have to buy many more school buses, an expensive proposition. Or they would have to start elementary schools earlier, in the current high school time slot, and that could mean young students waiting at bus stops 'at 6 a.m. in the dark,' Bradley said.
'The feedback is overwhelming,' she added, noting that most school administrators opposed the shift.
Numerous school officials, including those from Orange and Seminole counties, filled out cards at Monday's meeting indicating they approved of the new law (SB 296) that would axe the mandate for later high school start times.
'I did vote for the bill when it came through, and I do love the idea of having later start times for our older students,' said Sen. Lori Berman, D- Boynton Beach.
But members of the Palm Beach County School Board told her 'it was just impossible for them to be able to meet this mandate,' she said. 'I wish we could figure out a way to make it work.'
As soon as the 2023 law passed, school district leaders said they worried they could not afford the switch the state wanted, even as they acknowledged the benefits.
Researchers in Minnesota and Washington, among others, determined that pushing back high school start times to about 8:30 a.m. meant teenagers slept more, had better grades, test scores and attendance rates and got into fewer morning car crashes.
'The science is very clear,' said Rep. John Temple, R-Wildwood, the 2023 bill's sponsor, as it was discussed in a legislative committee that spring.
Sen. Danny Burgess, R-Zephyrhills, who sponsored a Senate version two years ago, on Monday said, 'I 100% believe in the science, as we all do.'
But even with a 'three-year glide path' school districts could not make it work. 'I think we've heard the feedback.'
The state provides only about half a school district's transportation funding.
To keep bus transportation costs in check, most Central Florida school districts stagger start times, typically opening high schools first, then elementary schools and then middle schools. That is the most efficient way to use available school buses and drivers, as many can make 'triple runs,' dropping students at a high school, then an elementary school and then a middle school.
The only way to keep costs the same and meet the law's requirements would be to start elementary schools in the earliest time slot, they said.
In 2023, the Osceola County school district estimated that to start high schools later but leave elementary school schedules alone would mean buying 150 more buses and hiring that many more drivers. The cost for the buses alone would be about $22 million and finding the drivers would be challenging, officials said, as there is a statewide shortage that continues now.
The only senator to vote against the bill was Sen. Don Gaetz, R-Niceville, though he did not share his reason.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
TikTok influencer targeted with criticism after viral video about 'unchic' fashion choices sparks backlash
Lifestyle influencer Tara Langdale talked to Fox News Digital about how she received hurtful messages from critics after a not-so-serious fashion post describing what she views as "unchic" went viral, spawning a cascade of events that made her apolitical post a victim of attacks. The self-described stay-at-home working mom amassed some 250,000 views and found herself on the receiving end of some hate after an April 7 TikTok of her seated, drinking from a wine glass with nicely done hair, gold jewelry and manicured nails as she skimmed through a list of "unchic" fashion sins. Tattoos, Lululemon, baggy denim, camouflage and visible panty lines were just a few that made part one of Langdale's controversial "unchic" list, which drew backlash from seething critics who called her out with a political twist. "Voting for Trump is unchic," one said. Vogue Attacks Melania Trump's Official White House Portrait, Compares Her To 'Freelance Magician' "To her, privilege = chic. Hope this helps!" said another. Read On The Fox News App A third said, "just say you're a republican and go lmao," while a slew of commenters took exception to her tattoo stance and ranted about classism. The video even caught The Guardian's attention, prompting an article that coined "chic" as "a shorthand for a type of conservative-coded aesthetic" and spoke of the "rigid and airbrushed" looks of Trump allies, sch as Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt. Though Langdale diddles cribe herself as conservative when speaking to Fox News Digital, she insists not everything is about politics. "When I get dressed in the morning, I'm not thinking about my political party and how I should dress to showcase that," Langdale said. "I think conservativism is more of culture, religion – all of those things go into your conservativist mindset. Now, if you're talking about conservative style of dress… that's also going to be more like religion and culture," she went on. "Of course, if I'm going to church on Sunday, I'm dressing very conservative. I'm going to keep it classy, but if you see me in the street in my regular day-to-day, I am not at all conservative. I would never consider my style to be conservative. But am I conservative? Absolutely, so I can differentiate the two. I know that the internet has a hard time doing that." Mom Living With Alopecia Reacts To Liberal Women Shaving Heads To Be 'Unattractive' After Donald Trump's Win Langdale addressed the politicized dogma, saying she doesn't understand why TikTok users jumped to conclusions about "conservative" or "Republican makeup" as they did. "Because I'm blonde, because I have more of a natural look about me, I'm not fully glammed all the time… I'm really not sure how that makes me appear conservative, but, again, I just think when people don't agree with what you say, they have to find a way to discredit you, and that's just an easy tactic," she continued. At the same time, Langdale pushed back against the idea of her video implying that people too poor to afford expensive items are automatically "unchic," and pointed to brand-name items like athletic apparel brand Lululemon, Apple Watches and Golden Goose sneakers – all of which can be pricey – as evidence pointing to the contrary. "Just keep in mind that money talks and wealth whispers, and I don't know any wealthy people that are wearing Gucci across their chest," she said in her original post. Langdale explained that the TikTok trend of users showcasing "things I find incredibly chic" grabbed her attention as they began circulating on the app. She found them "pretentious and off-putting," so she felt compelled to take her own stab at the video. New York Times Guest Essay Suggests Fashion Industry Has 'Given Up' On 'Woke' Values "Of course, my video came off as pretentious and off-putting as well, but it felt like a certain level of cringe for me, and I don't like to personally attack anybody on social media, so I wouldn't go after a specific creator. I just kind of wanted to hop on the trend… so that was my initial, 'Why I created the video.'" Langdale shared that her direct messages on the platform have been "insane" with threats and comments about her family since the video went viral. "It does make you step back and take a pause," she shared. "Like, is this really worth it for how crazy people react? And I would never want to put my family in danger, but I think a lot of it is just the keyboard pirates that are just back there behind their computer typing whatever they can to try to get more likes in the comments," Langdale article source: TikTok influencer targeted with criticism after viral video about 'unchic' fashion choices sparks backlash
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
FLASHBACK: Musk accused Trump, GOP leaders of not wanting to cut spending — here's where they said they would
Elon Musk's fiery feud with President Donald Trump spilled onto the top Republicans in Congress, where the tech billionaire questioned if their zeal to cut spending had disappeared. Musk launched into a social media assault this week against Trump's "big, beautiful bill," and accused Republicans of crafting a "disgusting abomination" full of wasteful spending. What started as a rant against the bill turned into pointed attacks against Trump, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. 'He's Not A Big Factor': Trump's Senate Allies Dismiss Elon Musk's Calls To 'Kill The Bill' The tech billionaire and former head of Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) lamented the bill as not cutting deep enough into Washington's spending addiction. The House GOP's offering, which is now being modified in the Senate, set a goal of $1.5 trillion in spending cuts. Musk set a benchmark of finding $2 trillion in waste, fraud and abuse to slash with his DOGE initiative, but fell far short, hitting only $160 billion in his four-month stint as a special government employee. Read On The Fox News App Elon Musk Warpath Against Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Rattles House Gop Still, he came with receipts, questioning whether Trump, Thune and Johnson were actually committed to making deep cuts. Below are moments from the campaign trail and recent months compiled by Fox News Digital where the trio affirmed their commitment to putting a dent in the nation's nearly $37 trillion debt. A common theme for Trump during his 2024 presidential campaign was to go after the Biden administration, and his opponent, former Vice President Kamala Harris, for "throwing billions of dollars out the window." The then-presidential candidate vowed that should he win a second term, his incoming administration would halt wasteful spending. "We will stop wasteful spending and big government special interest giveaways, and finally stand up for the American taxpayer, which hasn't happened since I was president," he said. "We stood up. Our current massive deficits will be reduced to practically nothing. Our country will be powered by growth. Our country, will be powered by growth, will pay off our debt, will have all this income coming in." Gop Senators Express 'Concerns,' 'Skepticism' Over Trump's Spending Bill After Musk Rant Thune has agreed with his colleagues in the House GOP that the tax cut package needs to achieve steep savings, and believes that the Senate GOP could take those cuts a step further. After the bill advanced from the House last month, the top Senate Republican re-upped his vow to slash federal funding. "It does everything that we set out to do. It modernizes our military, secures our border, extends tax relief and makes permanent tax relief that will lead to economic growth and better jobs in this country, and makes America energy dominant, coupled with the biggest spending reduction in American history," he said. "So those are our agenda items, and that's what we campaigned on. That's what we're going to do." Johnson had to strike a balancing act in the House to cobble together enough support behind the legislation, and struck deals and satisfied concerned lawmakers across the spectrum of the House GOP while still setting a goal of $1.5 trillion in spending cuts. Rooting out waste, fraud and abuse has been a continued mantra of the speaker and his allies. "I said this is the beginning of a process, and what you're going to see is a continuing theme of us identifying waste, fraud and abuse in government, which is our pledge of common sense, restoring common sense and fiscal sanity," Johnson said. Original article source: FLASHBACK: Musk accused Trump, GOP leaders of not wanting to cut spending — here's where they said they would
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate sparks outrage after blocking state's gas car ban in stunning reversal: 'We are sowing poison seeds for the future'
The United States Senate voted in late May to overturn California's strict vehicle emissions standards, which were set to phase out sales of new gas-powered cars by 2035. In a 51-44 vote, the Senate reversed a decision that had given California the green light to enforce rules requiring an increasing number of new-car sales in the state to be zero-emission vehicles. As reported by the Los Angeles Times, federal lawmakers pulled back approval for a major environmental policy that aimed to speed the shift to electric vehicles and cut down on harmful air pollution and carbon emissions. Using the Congressional Review Act to repeal the waivers has been reported as atypical of Senate procedures. NPR also noted that "there are significant questions" about whether this use of the CRA has strong legal standing. In an effort to keep California's policies in place and allow the state to move forward to a cleaner and cooler future, Senator Adam Schiff had issued a dire warning to the Senate. "We are sowing poison seeds for the future," Schiff said, per the LA Times. "Seeds that will grow to be more asthma and more sickness and more hospitalization and more death. That is the bleak but blatant reality of what we are debating here today." The policy, known as Advanced Clean Cars II, was introduced by the California Air Resources Board in 2022. It was then approved by the Environmental Protection Agency in late 2024. The policy would have required carmakers to steadily increase the number of electric or hybrid vehicles they sell in California. By 2035, only zero-emission or hybrid vehicles would have been allowed as new-car sales in the state. In 2022, California Governor Gavin Newsom released a comprehensive plan for the state to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. This included Advanced Clean Cars ll and other initiatives designed to focus on renewable energy, clean buildings, carbon removal, and clean fuels. Ahead of the 51-44 vote and from the Senate floor, Senator John Barrasso offered up a rebuke of Advanced Clean Cars ll and other policies designed to encourage the adoption of EVs. "Democrats have this delusional dream of eliminating gas-powered vehicles in America," he said, per the LA Times. "They want to force-feed electric vehicles to every man and woman who drives in this country. Well, Republicans are ready to use the Congressional Review Act to end this Democrat electric vehicle fantasy," Barrasso added. With federal lawmakers rescinding a state's requirements intended to improve air quality and reduce heat-trapping pollution, there could be consequences for human health. For example, the particulate matter produced by gas-powered cars, especially in areas of dense population and high traffic, has been linked to serious concerns, including decreased lung function and cardiac conditions, with the greatest impacts on children, older people, and marginalized communities. Should the government ban gas stoves? Yes Only in new buildings Only in restaurants No way Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. By revoking Advanced Clean Cars ll, the Senate may have also greatly impacted the fate of similar policies around the country. Following California's lead, 11 other states have drawn up plans to gradually phase out gas-powered cars over the coming decades. These states include New York, Massachusetts, Colorado, and New Mexico. Now that the measure has passed in the Senate, it will go to President Donald Trump, who is expected to sign it into law. However, Newsom and California Attorney General Rob Bonta said the state would sue in an attempt to restore the gradual gas-powered vehicle ban. While speaking at a news conference, Newsom pointed to a larger picture, one he says goes well beyond the borders of California. "This is about our economy, it's about our health, it's about our global competitiveness," Newsom said. "It is, Donald Trump, about our national security, and it's about our ability to continue to innovate and outpace competition all across the globe," he added. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.