Daylight Savings: It's about the sunlight
It's not about the math.
But it is about the sunlight.
"My goal is just to make sure people get more sunshine," said Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass.
"I am fond of saying you can't shovel sunshine," said Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Tex.
"The American people love having an extra hour of sunlight," said Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla.
'Stop The Clock': Gop, Dems Come Together To End Daylight Saving Over Health, Economic Risks
Read On The Fox News App
Tax day is upon us. So millions of Americans are hoping they score a refund from the federal government.
And millions of Americans are hoping Washington can help them pocket an extra hour of daylight too.
This is why Congress is trying to maximize the sun.
Some lawmakers believe it's time to "lock the clock." Either choosing Standard Time or Daylight Saving Time. But the twice-a-year clock switching may be living on borrowed time.
That's why the Senate Commerce Committee held the first Congressional hearing on the biannual time change for the first time in three years last week.
"We need to stop the clock. We need to find a solution and stick with it," said Sen. Lisa Blunt Rochester, D-Del. "People across our country are tired of the constant cycle of falling back and springing forward. I mean, who hasn't forgotten to change their clock on their microwave. I think mine is still on the wrong time."
We Live In Time: Daylight Savings And The 'Time Lords' Of Congress
President Trump has weighed in several times in opposition to the clock switching – both during this term in office and during his previous tenure.
In March, the President called it a "50-50 issue." But Mr. Trump again wrinkled the time conversation with a post on Truth Social. Despite not taking a stand when the U.S. "sprang forward," President Trump was emphatic about what should happen now.
"The House and Senate should push hard for more Daylight at the end of a day. Very popular and, most importantly, no more changing of the clocks, a big inconvenience and, for our government, A VERY COSTLY EVENT!!!," wrote the President.
Rick Scott has grappled with the time issue before. Scott served two terms as governor of Florida before entering the Senate. Scott signed a bill into law that would let the Sunshine State (go figure) opt out of the time change. A similar piece of legislation has bipartisan support on Capitol Hill.
Scott looked to the president's lead.
"We have a great opportunity to finally get this done with President Trump on board to lock the clock," said Scott.
But locking it an hour ahead? Or an hour behind? There's little agreement.
Trump Says Congress Should Push 'For More Daylight At The End Of A Day'
The Senate voted to permanently park the U.S. on Daylight Saving Time in 2022. Secretary of State and then-Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., surprisingly advanced a bill without objection from any senator.
"Without objection, so ordered!" exclaimed former Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, I-Ariz., who presided over the Senate that day.
"Yes!" she declared, yanking her arms toward her like a coach who's kicker just drilled a field goal late in the game.
But the plan died in the House.
"The spring clock change to Daylight Saving Time is bad. But permanent Daylight Saving Time is worse," testified Karin Johnson a Professor of Neurology at UMass Chan School of Medicine. "The later sunrises and sunsets of Daylight Saving Time lead to higher risks of chronic diseases, including but not limited to cancer, diabetes, heart disease, obesity, and these outweigh the short term risks of what happens with the time change."
Johnson also told senators that "year-round Standard Time is a natural, healthy choice promoting physical health, mental health performance and safety."
Congress Debates Future Of Daylight Saving Time
Johnson argued that the U.S. should not "pick something that's been tried and failed twice before."
Johnson's right. The U.S. has "sprung" forward to Daylight Saving Time – or its equivalent – on two separate occasions. In 1918, Congress voted for the nation to embrace Daylight Saving Time to conserve energy during World War I. Farmers pushed a repeal of Daylight Saving Time. So Congress undid it. President Woodrow Wilson vetoed the bill. But Congress overrode him. It's one of only 112 successful presidential veto overrides by Congress in the history of the republic.
Lawmakers greenlighted the Emergency Daylight Saving Time Energy Conservation Act – triggering year-round Daylight Saving Time – in the mid 1970s. This was in response to the OPEC oil shocks. The nation was supposed to remain on Daylight Saving Time for two years. But the new time proved so unpopular that lawmakers unwound the clocks to Standard Time after only a few months.
However, permanent Daylight Saving Time has its advocates.
Jay Karen of the National Golf Course Owners Association told senators that shifting the clocks an hour ahead would prompt an extra 27 million rounds of golf on the links each year. Karen estimated that golf course owners would pocket an additional $1 billion.
"Americans overwhelmingly prefer evening recreation over early morning," testified Karen.
But do you know who absolutely hates Daylight Saving Time?
Convicts!
A University of Washington study found that the single toughest sentencing day of the year is the Monday after we spring forward each March.
Blame it on cranky judges who lost an hour of sleep.
Daylight Saving Time: There Oughta Be A Law
"Some people receive harsher sentences than they otherwise would," said Scott Yates of the Lock the Clock Movement.
Justice may be blind. But it can certainly tell time.
Arizona and Hawaii don't observe Daylight Saving Time.
Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., is leery of a nationwide fix. Two time zones cleave the Hoosier State.
"We have 12 counties in the western part of the state that are in the Central Time Zone," said Young. "Maybe a one-size-fits-all national policy on time changes doesn't take into account the regional differences that significantly impact daily life."
It all hinges on location. Some people in the north and east will benefit for some of the year. But the sun will come up too early in the summer and set too early in the winter. Residents on the western ends of time zones seem to get more sunlight later in the year as well. But other locales? Not so much.
"Hello darkness, my old friend," mused Cruz, channeling Simon & Garfunkel.
During the hearing, Cruz commented to a witness that "your time has expired."
And that may be the case with the time change. But not unless Congress can agree what to do.
Even the name of the March time switch is contrived. It's classic Washington spin. "Daylight Saving." Lawmakers are essentially trying to convince the public they're getting more of something – for free. But they're not.
There are only so many hours and minutes of sunlight in the day. Period. It's always going to get too dark too early somewhere. And the sun will always come up too early somewhere. And even though Congress has a lot of clout, it certainly can't control that.Original article source: Daylight Savings: It's about the sunlight
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
9 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Alberta resumes buying U.S. alcohol, months after pause meant to fight tariffs
EDMONTON - Alberta is buying American alcohol and gambling machines again, three months after Premier Danielle Smith announced restrictions aimed at fighting back against U.S. tariffs. Service Alberta Minister Dale Nally said Friday that the move signals a 'renewed commitment to open and fair trade' with the United States. Smith said in March that the province would no longer buy U.S. alcohol and video lottery terminals, or sign contracts with American companies. Alberta's liquor stores are privately owned but must order stock through the provincial government. That came a day after U.S. President Donald Trump slapped heavy tariffs on Canadian goods and energy. Other premiers also announced bans on U.S. liquor along with other proposed penalties. Nally said in a statement that the decision to resume buying U.S. alcohol and gambling machines 'sets the stage for more constructive negotiations' ahead of a renewal of the Canada-U.S.-Mexico trade agreement. The agreement, known as CUSMA, was negotiated during the first Trump administration and is up for a mandatory review in 2026. 'Prime Minister Mark Carney has made a clear effort to reset the relationship with the U.S. administration, and Alberta's government supports this approach,' Nally said. 'We are focused on highlighting Alberta's role as a responsible and collaborative trading partner and will continue working alongside other provinces to advocate for a tariff-free relationship.' The minister said Albertans are encouraged to continue supporting local producers, even as more U.S. options return to store shelves. In April, the province paused its policy around procurement from U.S. companies in what Nally called 'the spirit of diplomacy.' This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 6, 2025. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Boston Globe
11 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Healey touts state tuition savings, criticizes federal cuts to Pell Grants
Overall, MASSGrant Plus Expansion program saved more than 34,000 Massachusetts students an estimated $110 million in the 2023-2024 academic year, the statement said. More than 7,730 middle income students saved an average of $3,856 each, according to data from the state Department of Higher Education, the statement said. Advertisement In the same statement, Healey urged the US Senate to reject Pell Grant cuts included in the federal budget reconciliation bill recently passed by Republicans in the U.S. House and supported by President Trump. The proposed cuts and eligibility restrictions would results in 42,000 Massachusetts students at public institutions losing $57 million in funding each year, according to Healey's statement said. 'Massachusetts is home to the best schools in the country, but we need to make sure that they are affordable for all of our students,' Healey's statement said. 'That's why I took action to increase financial aid at our public colleges and universities, which has already lowered costs for tens of thousands of students.' The drastic cuts proposed to the Pell Grant program would 'roll back the progress we have made and increase costs,' Healey said. Advertisement 'This is bad for our students and bad for our economy, as it would hold back our next generation of workers from being able to afford to go to school,' she said. Healey announced $62 million in new state funding to expand the MASSGrant program during a ceremony at Salem State University in November 2023. The new funding covered the full costs of tuition and mandatory instructional fees for Pell Grant-eligible students, and as much as half for middle-income students. Middle-income students are those whose families earn between $73,000 and $100,000 annually in adjusted gross income. The program was retroactive to the start of the fall 2023 semester for Massachusetts students at the states public institutions, including its 15 community colleges, nine state universities, and four University of Massachusetts undergraduate campuses. Funding for the expansion of the program also drew on $84 million Healey and the legislature had set earmarked for financial aid expansion in the FY24 budget, Healey's office said at the time. 'The dramatic enrollment increases our community colleges have seen over the last two years make it clear that free community college and expanded financial aid is a game changer for students in Massachusetts,' Luis Pedraja, chair of the Community College Council of Presidents, and president of Quinsigamond Community College said in the statement. 'The proposed Pell eligibility changes would be devastating to our students' ability to afford higher education and the community college presidents in Massachusetts urge the Senate to reject this ill-advised change,' Pedraja said. Education Secretary Patrick Tutwiler said he feared the impacts proposed cuts could have on students who struggle to afford college. Advertisement 'Low-income students deserve to go to college just as much as their higher income peers, and these changes are going to take us backwards – increasing dropout rates and leaving students saddled with more debt and no degree," Tutwiler said in the statement. Tonya Alanez can be reached at
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Is a $5,000 DOGE stimulus check a real thing? What we know
In February, President Donald Trump said he was considering a plan to pay out $5,000 stimulus checks to American taxpayers from the savings identified by billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Are they happening? No official plan or schedule for such a payout has been released, and a decision on the checks would have to come from Congress, which has so far been cool to the idea. And there have been questions as to how much DOGE has actually saved. The idea was floated by Azoria investment firm CEO James Fishback, who suggested on Musk's social media platform X that Trump and Musk should "should announce a 'DOGE Dividend'" from the money saved from reductions in government waste and workforce since it was American taxpayer money in the first place. He even submitted a proposal for how it would work, with a timeline for after the expiration of DOGE in July 2026. "At $2 trillion in DOGE savings and 78 million tax-paying households, this is a $5,000 refund per household, with the remaining used to pay down the national debt," he said in a separate post. Musk replied, "Will check with the President." "We're considering giving 20% of the DOGE savings to American citizens and 20% to paying down the debt," Trump said in a during the Saudi-sponsored FII PRIORITY Summit in Miami Beach the same month. DOGE has dismantled entire federal agencies, wiped out government contracts and led the firings of tens of thousands of federal workers, leaving many agencies struggling to continue operations. DOGE checks? Elon Musk dodges DOGE stimulus check question during Wisconsin rally: Here's what he said. Fishbeck suggested that the potential refund go only to households that are net-income taxpayers, or households that pay more in taxes than they get back. The Pew Research Center said that most Americans with an adjusted gross income of under $40,000 effectively pay no federal income tax. They would not be eligible. If DOGE achieves Musk's initial goal of stripping $2 trillion from U.S. government spending by 2026, Fishback's plan was for $5,000 per household, or 20% of the savings divided by the number of eligible households. If DOGE doesn't hit the goal, Fishback said the amount should be adjusted accordingly. 'So again, if the savings are only $1 trillion, which I think is awfully low, the check goes from $5,000 to $2,500,' Fishback said during a podcast appearance. 'If the savings are only $500 billion, which, again, is really, really low, then the [checks] are only $1,250.' However, while Musk talked about saving $2 trillion in federal spending during Trump's campaign, he lowered the goal to $1 trillion after Trump assumed office and said in March he was on pace to hit that goal by the end of May. At a Cabinet meeting in April, Musk lowered the projected savings further to $150 billion in fiscal year 2026. Musk left the White House at the end of May when his designation as a "special government employee" ended. DOGE, the advisory group he created, is expected to continue without him. That depends on who you ask. On its website, DOGE claims to have saved an estimated $175 billion as of May 30, "a combination of asset sales, contract and lease cancellations and renegotiations, fraud and improper payment deletions, grant cancellations, interest savings, programmatic changes, regulatory savings, and workforce reductions." The site says that works out to $1,086.96 saved per taxpayer. However, many of DOGE's claims have been exaggerated and several of the initiatives to slash agency workforces have been challenged in court. DOGE has been accused of taking credit for contracts that were canceled before DOGE was created, failing to factor in funds the government is required to pay even if a contract is canceled, and tallying every contract by the most that could possibly be spent on it even when nothing near that amount had been obligated. The website list has been changed as the media pointed out errors, such as a claim that an $8 million savings was actually $8 billion. On May 30, CNN reported that one of its reporters found that less than half the $175 billion figure was backed up with even basic documentation, making verification difficult if not impossible. Some of the changes may also end up costing taxpayers more, such as proposed slashes to the Internal Revenue Service that experts say would mean less tax revenue generated, resulting in a net cost of about $6.8 billion. Over the next 10 years, if IRS staffing stays low, the cumulative cost in uncollected taxes would hit $159 billion, according to the nonpartisan Budget Lab at Yale University. The per-taxpayer claim on the website is also inflated, CNN said, as it's based on '161 million individual federal taxpayers' and doesn't seem to include married people filing jointly. This article originally appeared on Florida Times-Union: DOGE dividends: Will American taxpayers get a $5,000 check?
