Sun sets on attempt to end daylight savings in SD
House defeats bill for new men's prison
Senate Bill 186, brought by Republican Sen. Carl Perry, would have exempted the state of South Dakota from the practice of daylight savings, which runs from March 9 – November 2 in 2025, and at which time clocks are set forward one hour, causing the sun to both rise and set an hour later.
Perry, in advocating his bill, cited the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, arguing standard time better aligns with circadian rhythms and improves public health and safety.
Sleep is a major part of Perry's equation, as he notes that daylight savings disrupts sleep cycles. He also added dark mornings can lead to increased risks of car crashes.
Republican Sen. Lauren Nelson also spoke in support of the measure, providing her views as teacher and how the time change loses them a week of instruction.
Nelson also advocated for keeping standard time as the year-round time, as opposed to full-time daylight savings, on account of the dangers of parents driving their kids to school in the dark in the morning.
Republican Sen. John Sjaarda gave opposition testimony, not from his position as a legislator, but as a farmer.
A challenge to find shelter for rural homeless people
'I love daylight savings time,' remarked Sjaarda. 'I know it doesn't change the amount of daylight in a day, but it moves one hour of daylight from when most people are sleeping like 4:00 in the morning to when people are awake like 8:00 in the evening.'
Sjaarda noted this extra hour is nice to have on the farm for when you're baling, spraying or working with livestock.
'I know some of you will say just wake up an hour earlier. Well, that's possible for me. But what about all the people who are working 8 to 5 jobs? They go home at 530. They want to go get a round of golf in before dark. They want to take the boat out to the lake and do some surfing with the family or do yard work,' said Sjaarda.
Also mentioned by Sjaarda were all the kids playing sports late in the summer and into autumn. 'As the weeks go by and the sun keeps setting earlier and earlier, by the 1st of October, it's getting dark by 7:00. If we don't have daylight savings time, it'll be dark by 6:00,' he said.
Ultimately, the arguments of the proponents failed to enlighten the committee, who upon a motion to defer the bill to the 41st day, voted to do so on an 8-1 vote, with Perry himself the only committee member voting against killing his bill.
'It just wasn't ready for prime time, I guess,' quipped committee chair, Republican Sen. Jim Mehlhaff, with a chuckle. 'What time was it,' replied Perry.
Giving comment to KELOLAND at the end of day on Friday, Perry explained that just because the bill failed, that does not mean there wasn't support for it.
Perry cited the proponent testimony and added that he does think the issue should be looked at again in the future.
Benefits to sleep, safety and health were the main drivers of this bill, according to Perry, who called this a 'constituent bill', saying that his role is to listen to th constituents, and that this was what they wanted.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
21 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
House committee launches investigation into California's high-speed rail project
A bipartisan congressional committee is investigating whether California's High-Speed Rail Authority knowingly misrepresented ridership projections and financial outlooks, as alleged by the Trump administration, to secure federal funding. In a letter sent to Department of Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy on Tuesday, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform chair James Comer (R-KY) requested a staff briefing and all communications and records about federal funding for the high-speed rail project and any analysis over the train's viability. 'The Authority's apparent repeated use of misleading ridership projections, despite longstanding warnings from experts, raises serious questions about whether funds were allocated under false pretenses,' Comer wrote. Comer's letter copied Congressman Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the committee who has also voiced skepticism about the project. Garcia, whose districts represent communities in Southern California, was not immediately available for comment. An authority spokesperson called the House committee's investigation 'another baseless attempt to manufacture controversy around America's largest and most complex infrastructure project,' and added that the project's chief executive Ian Choudri previously addressed the claims and called them 'cherrypicked and out-of-date, and therefore misleading.' Last month, the Trump administration pulled $4 billion in federal funding from the project meant for construction in the Central Valley. After a months-long review, prompted by calls from Republican lawmakers, the administration found 'no viable path' forward for the fast train, which is billions of dollars over budget and years behind schedule. The administration also questioned whether the authority's projected ridership counts were intentionally misrepresented. California leaders called the move 'illegal' and sued the Trump administration for declaratory and injunctive relief. Gov. Gavin Newsom said it was 'a political stunt' and a 'heartless attack on the Central Valley.' The bullet train was proposed decades ago as a way to connect Los Angeles and San Francisco in less than three hours by 2020. While the entire line has cleared environmental reviews, no stretch of the route has been completed. Construction has been limited to the Central Valley, where authority leaders have said a segment between Merced and Bakersfield will open by 2033. The project is also about $100 billion over its original budget of $33 billion. Even before the White House pulled federal funding, authority leaders and advisers repeatedly raised concerns over the project's long-term financial sustainability. Roughly $13 billion has been spent so far — the bulk of which was supplied by the state, which has proposed $1 billion per year towards the project. But Choudri, who started at the authority last year, has said the project needs to find new sources of funding and has turned focus toward establishing public-private partnerships to supplement costs.
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US attorney will no longer bring felony charges against people for carrying rifles or shotguns in DC
WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal prosecutors in the nation's capital will no longer bring felony charges against people for possessing rifles or shotguns in the District of Columbia, according to a new policy adopted by the leader of the nation's largest U.S. attorney's office. That office will continue to pursue charges when someone is accused of using a shotgun or rifle in a violent crime or has a criminal record that makes it illegal to have a firearm. Local authorities in Washington can prosecute people for illegally possessing unregistered rifles and shotguns. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro said in a statement that the change is based on guidance from the Justice Department and the Office of Solicitor General and conforms with two Supreme Court decisions on gun rights. Pirro, a former Fox News host, has been a vocal critic of local officials' crime-fighting efforts since Republican President Donald Trump installed her in office in May. Her policy shift means federal prosecutors will not purse charges under the D.C. law that made it illegal to carry rifles or shotguns, except in limited cases involving permit holders. The change also overlaps with Trump's declaration of a crime emergency in the city, flooding the streets of Washington with patrols of hundreds of federal agents and National Guard members. The White House says 76 firearms have been seized since the crackdown started this month. The new policy also coves large-capacity magazines, but it does not apply to handguns. 'We will continue to seize all illegal and unlicensed firearms, and to vigorously prosecute all crimes connected with them,' Pirro said, adding that she and Trump "are committed to prosecuting gun crime.' Pirro said a blanket ban on possessing shotguns and rifles violates the Supreme Court's ruling in 2022 that struck down a New York gun law and held that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense. She also pointed to the high court's 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller striking down the city's ban on handguns in the home.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Obama: Newsom redistricting approach ‘responsible'
Former President Obama backs California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D)'s plan to redraw California's congressional districts if it helps offset new maps in Texas that are more favorable to Republicans. 'I believe that Gov. Newsom's approach is a responsible approach,' Obama told a Martha's Vineyard, Mass., fundraiser crowd Tuesday, according to excerpts shared with reporters. 'We're only going to do it if and when Texas and/or other Republican states begin to pull these maneuvers. Otherwise, this doesn't go into effect.' Newsom, who is considered a contender for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028, has been leading Democrats as they battle against the GOP's efforts to maintain control of the House in the 2026 midterms. President Trump set off a political arms race for more right-tilted and left-tilted House districts in states where one party holds control. Trump pushed Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) to call state lawmakers into a special session to approve new maps to boost the number of reliably Republican seats, setting off a fight with Democrats in Texas and elsewhere. Newsom responded by calling on California lawmakers to come up with ways to skirt the state's redistricting regulations and produce maps more favorable to Democrats to even the score. Obama said he personally believes that redistricting should be strictly nonpartisan, but he doesn't fault Democrats for engaging in the tit-for-tat. 'I've had to wrestle with my preference, which would be that we don't have political gerrymandering, but what I also know is that if we don't respond effectively, then this White House and Republican-controlled state governments all across the country, they will not stop, because they do not appear to believe in this idea of an inclusive, expansive democracy,' he told the crowd. 'They want to restrict it, and they're not that shy about saying so.' 'That is not my preference, but we cannot unilaterally allow one of the two major parties to rig the game, and California is one of the states that has the capacity to offset a large state like Texas,' he added. Obama was speaking at an event for the National Democratic Redistricting Committee and its affiliates that raised $2 million. Former Attorney General Eric Holder and Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) also attended.
