A bill banning cell phones in school for kids in K-8 is one step closer to becoming law
A bill that would ban cell phones in public schools in kindergarten through 8th grade moved one step closer to becoming law on Tuesday.
'I would definitely be for it. I think kids need to be focused on learning, not be distracted by social media,' parent Robert Stewart said.
While some people like the idea of a school cell phone ban, others see the benefits of letting students have some access to their phones.
'I like that we can know where he is,' Parent Barbara Myers said.
Myers said her 9-year-old grandson sometimes calls her during lunch to talk about plans after school.
'I think it should be limited. I think they should not be able to use them in class time,' Myers said.
RELATED STORIES:
Georgia student phone, tablet ban passes House vote, heads to state Senate
Ban on student phones in Georgia public schools back up for review in House Education Committee
Schools participating in cellphone lock-up pilot program says discipline issues are down
Tuesday afternoon, the Georgia Senate Children and Families Committee passed the Distraction-free Education Act" by a four-to one-vote.
'The data overwhelmingly shows us. And we know just really by instinct, that cell phones in classrooms are not conducive to education,' State Rep. Scott Hilton said.
The bill prohibits public school students in grades kindergarten through eight from accessing personal electronic devices during the school day. That includes smartphones, headphones, tablets and smartwatches.
School-issued electronic devices could still be used. The bill also includes exceptions for IEPs and medical plans.
'Of course there probably need to be some things in place for emergencies to make sure their parents can get in touch with them,' Stewart said.
The bill leaves that up to individual school systems.
School districts also would come up with policies on storing devices and consequences for violations.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
14 minutes ago
- The Hill
House Democrat heckled over Israel-Hamas war at town hall
Freshman Rep. Wesley Bell (D-Mo.) faced backlash over his support for Israel during a rowdy town hall event Tuesday night in downtown St. Louis. Videos from the event show Bell repeatedly interjecting 'Can we talk?' and 'Let's talk about it' as attendees shouted at him about the ongoing Middle East conflict and war in Gaza. 'When it comes to the word 'genocide,' I kind of disagree with it, because the bottom line is … Israel was attacked by an openly genocidal terrorist group,' he said at one point, referencing the deadly Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks. 'How do you get around that?' 'We need to end the war, we need to return every single hostage and Hamas has to go,' he continued. Bell joined the House in January, unseating former Rep. Cori Bush (D), who has blamed pro-Israel groups for her defeat. Bell, whose office didn't immediately respond to The Hill's request for comment on Wednesday, thanked attendees with a post on the social platform X acknowledging the rancor. 'Yes the conversations were passionate at times, but Democracy is messy & we have to passionately defend it,' he wrote. 'At the end of the day we're going to continue to fight for the ST LOUIS region & for our country!' The former St. Louis County prosecutor told local media after the event that he wasn't surprised by the disruptions. 'I thought it would be a little even more contentious to be perfectly honest, because there's a lot of people that are passionate about the issues, and we're seeing this around the country,' Bell said. He noted that lawmakers from both parties have faced similar disruptions across the country this year. 'People are scared; they're concerned,' Bell said. 'There's issues that they're passionate about, so let's have those conversations. It's important.' Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) was jeered during a nonpartisan event in her district earlier this week.
UPI
15 minutes ago
- UPI
Texas state House ready to pass redistricting bill despite Dems
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott will sign the redistricting bill that the state legislature is ready to pass. File Photo by Francis Chung/UPI | License Photo Aug. 20 (UPI) -- Texas state House Republicans are about to pass their redistricting bill Wednesday as the session reconvenes at 11 a.m. EDT Wednesday. Texas Republicans will pass the bill, encouraged by President Donald Trump, which will likely give the state an extra five Republican seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, after weeks of protests from Democrats in the state House. Because of their minority in the House, Democrats have no way to block passage of the redistricting bills. They have vowed to fight in the courts to prevent the new maps from being used. In the first special session called by Gov. Greg Abbott, Democrats fled the state for two weeks so that the House wouldn't have a quorum. Once the session timed out and Abbott called a new special session, Democrats returned to the state and a new battle ensued. Once Democrats came back to the capitol in Austin, they were not allowed to leave the chamber without a "permission slip," a police escort and 24-hour surveillance to ensure they don't leave the state again. One lawmaker, Rep. Nicole Collier, D-Fort Worth, spent Monday night in the capitol building, refusing to sign the paper. She said she plans to stay until Wednesday's session. Since then, several other Democrats tore up their waivers and joined her. "This is a civil discussion and disagreement, and in order to win, the other side is willing to use force -- to use the arms of a state to get what they want. Good guys don't do that," Texas House Democratic Caucus leader Rep. Gene Wu, told CNN. Wu and Rep. Vince Perez, D-El Paso, who signed the waivers, stayed with Collier through Monday night. Wednesday's session is expected to last all day and possibly into the evening, as there must be time to consider the map, consider amendments and have several votes. "It's going to be a long day," Rep Charlie Geren, R-Fort Worth, told the New York Times. The new state map introduced last month has been revised. It would still add the five seats but also strengthen already-Republican districts by adding Republican voters to those districts. The state's current districts, passed four years ago, are already being challenged in court, and a ruling is expected this fall. "Please pass this map ASAP," Trump posted on social media Monday. "Thank you, Texas!" Republicans have 25 of the state's 38 seats. California Gov. Gavin Newsom has already begun the process of redistricting the state to counteract Texas' efforts. Other Republican- and Democrat-led states have vowed to get in on the process.
UPI
15 minutes ago
- UPI
Texas redistricting sets course for partisan arms race
1 of 5 | Texas Republicans, led by Gov. Greg Abbott, are near passing a new congressional map that could spark a redistricting war between Republican and Democrat-led states. File Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo Aug. 20 (UPI) -- Texas Republicans are near passing a new congressional map that could spark a redistricting war between Republican and Democrat-led states. President Donald Trump called on Texas Republicans to add five more seats in U.S. Congress before the 2026 midterms. Democrats in California are preparing to respond with a redistricting plan of their own. More states are discussing joining the fray in retaliatory efforts to make partisan changes to district maps. Republicans hold a 219 to 212 majority in the U.S. House. "Trump's pressure on Texas is likely to set up a redistricting war, where states including California seek to counteract Texas and Trump tries to pressure more states like Missouri to draw more Republican districts," Richard Hasen, professor of political science and director of the Safeguarding Democracy Project at UCLA Law, told UPI. "It hurts representation when fairer districts are being replaced with noncompetitive districts drawn to give one side maximal advantage." Redistricting normally coincides with the release of the decennial census at the end of the decade. It is rare for redistricting to take place mid decade but it is not unheard of. State legislatures will redistrict mid decade due to court cases holding up past plans, sometimes for multiple years. Texas Republicans' plan Texas lawmakers are holding a special session to approve their plan which, in theory, will add five more congressional seats for Republicans. The state senate approved the plan last week in a 19-2 vote along party lines. Democrats in the state's House of Representatives left the State Capital earlier this month and refused to return, blocking the legislature from having a quorum and passing the redistricting plan. The special session was initially called by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott in response to the deadly flood in Hill Country, Texas, in July. State legislators were to meet to discuss emergency preparedness measures and releasing emergency funding for the affected communities. Abbott has called a second special session to finish passing the new map, with a vote slated for Friday. Emergency management related topics are also on the docket for the week, including relief funding. If passed and signed by Abbott, the redistricting plan reshapes the state's congressional districts to give Republicans an advantage among voters in five additional districts based on voter turnout in the past two general elections. Republicans hold 25 of Texas' 38 congressional seats. California Gov. Newsom responds California Gov. Gavin Newsom plans to call a special election to pass a ballot measure in the fall if Texas and Abbott pass their redistricting plan. Redistricting in California could counteract the Republican advantage created by Texas' new congressional map by swinging five seats for Democrats. The legislative package to create a new map in California has a trigger provision, meaning the map will only take effect if other states, like Texas, also redistrict. This means a Republican-led state, namely Texas, needs to enact a redrawn congressional map for California's redrawn map favoring Democrats to become active. The proposal also circumvents California's redistricting commission. California's state constitution grants the authority to redistrict to a redistricting commission. Voters in California granted this power to the commission by a vote in 2010. Newsom's proposal would override the commission when the law is triggered. The bill to authorize this redistricting plan is written to expire in 2030. Unlike Texas, which can pass a mid-decade redistricting plan purely through legislative action, California must change its state law which requires putting a measure before voters. "California will not sit idle as Trump and his Republican lapdogs shred our country's democracy before our very eyes," Newsom said in a statement. "In just six months, Trump's unchecked power has cost Americans billions and taken an ax to the greatest democracy we've ever known. This moment calls for urgency and action - that is what we are putting before voters this November, a chance to fight back against his anti-American ways." More states consider changes There are murmurs that lawmakers in more states are contemplating redistricting in response to Texas and California, including Missouri, New York, Illinois and Maryland, according to Justin Levitt, constitutional law professor at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles. Illinois and Maryland are like Texas in that they do not need to change their state law to commence redistricting. "I don't think we're done with the states that have currently stepped forward. The push to draw as many partisan lines as you can is not Constitutional," Levitt told UPI. "None of this is good for democracy." Cindy O'Laughlin, Republican Missouri senate president pro tem, posted on social media that legislators are always discussing redrawing district maps but lawmakers will follow the lead of Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe. "I know the governor will always consider options to make sure our representation in Washington matches our conservative majority here at home," she posted. "There has been no decision made by the governor (who I just met with) and we will follow his lead of course. He is supportive of Speaker [Mike] Johnson in Washington and the Trump administration." Republicans control six of Missouri's eight congressional seats. New York has an independent redistricting commission like California. Overriding the commission would require a change to the state's constitution. This can be done by a legislative amendment being approved across two consecutive legislative sessions, making it impossible to pass before the midterm elections. The amendment would then need to face the voters. Lawmakers in Ohio are already required to pass new congressional maps ahead of the midterm elections. In 2018, voters approved Ohio Issue 1, changing the requirements to pass congressional redistricting maps as well as the standards those maps must meet. It requires Republicans and Democrats to come to an agreement on district maps, which they have yet to do. Lawmakers must pass a map with 60% approval by Sept. 30, with at least half the members of each party approving it. If they do not, the Ohio Redistricting Commission will be charged with redistricting by Oct. 31. Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker has not ruled out Democrats in his state redrawing their congressional maps in direct response to Texas' plan. "Texas has basically declared there are no rules and other states are responding saying, 'Well yeah, if you're going to have no rules we're not going to have any rules," Levitt said. "It's a little bit like spinning on the precipice of the Cuban Missile Crisis. If everybody launches, nobody likes the world afterward." How voters will respond Lawmakers in California and Texas are leaning on the results of past elections to determine how effective their new maps will be in generating the results they seek. Levitt said relying on past elections may not predict future results. "Texas is making some assumptions. The plan that they've put forward says that it's going to swing five seats relying largely on the 2020 or 2024 electorate," he said. "That may or may not be the electorate that shows up. President Trump's not going to be on the ballot and if the electorate looks more like 2018, I think the effort is going to be a little less successful." The party that does not hold control over the Oval Office tends to fare better in competitive districts during midterm elections, Hasen said. Democrats flipped two Texas seats held by Republicans in 2018 and held another seat in a competitive district. "The party of the president usually loses seats in the midterm and Trump, at least as of now, has a pretty low approval rating," Hasen said. It is no guarantee that voters in California will approve a measure to allow redistricting. It was the voters who passed the creation of the redistricting commission. Levitt said voters, regardless of party, tend to oppose changes to their elections that they perceive as taking their power away, such as gerrymandering. "Voters reliably hate it," Levitt said. "Voters have reliably taken power away from politicians to choose who the voters are, and returned the power to voters to choose who the politicians are." Voters in New York rejected an effort to modify its redistricting process in 2021, voting down a measure to change its redistricting commission's voting process. Legal recourse The redistricting map that the Texas legislature passed after the 2020 census remains the subject of a legal battle as plaintiffs challenge it on grounds that it dilutes the political power of people of color. The case, Fair Maps Texas Action Committee vs. Abbott, alleges that the map denies voters of color the equal opportunity to elect their preferred candidates as it was drawn using race as a predominant factor to discriminate against them. "The problem is the clock," Levitt said. "Texas has been fighting those claims in court for four years now. For four years they've managed to fight to a draw in court just by stalling." Legal intervention has long been the way to challenge partisan gerrymanders that further quiet marginalized voices. However, a 2019 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court casts a shadow over the redistricting battle that is bubbling in Texas, California and other states. In its majority opinion in the case Rucho vs. Common Cause, the high court ruled that partisan gerrymandering claims "present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts." "The framers were aware of electoral districing problems and considered what to do about them," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote. "They settled on a characteristic approach, assigning the issue to the state legislatures, expressly checked and balanced by the federal Congress. At no point was there a suggestion that the federal courts had a role to play." The Supreme Court also weakened legal counters to discriminatory gerrymandering efforts in the 2013 case Shelby County vs. Holder. In that case, the court struck down a formula used under the Voting Rights Act to determine which states and jurisdictions must seek preclearance from the Justice Department to change election laws and voting maps. Sixteen states were subject to preclearance due to their histories of racially discriminatory voting practices. Texas and many other southern states were among those required to seek preclearance. Some jurisdictions in California and New York were also subject to preclearance requirements. Due to these Supreme Court decisions, Levitt is doubtful lawsuits will be effective in stopping redistricting plans from moving forward. "The Supreme Court doing away with the most effective medicine for those problems means that, purely based on timing, it's going to be awfully tough for a plaintiff, even with a good case, to get relief before the '26 elections," he said.
