Bill to eliminate daylight savings time in Arkansas fails in committee
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. – Arkansas legislators debated the impact of no longer adhering to daylight saving time on Wednesday.
The bill failed but after much debate between legislators in a House State Agencies and Governmental Affairs Committee on how it could impact things like our health or farming.
Daylight saving time 2025: These states are trying to 'lock the clocks'
Rep. Stephen Meeks (R-Greenbrier) sponsored a bill to eliminate daylight saving time in Arkansas and keep the state on standard time year-round.
'What daylight-saving time does is force us to get up an hour early each day, but we all don't go to bed an hour early every night, so we've got an already sleep-deprived society and we're making ourselves even more sleep-deprived,' Meeks said.
He said there are health effects on our bodies when the clock springs forward.
'Studies after studies have shown that by staying on daylight saving time, it's like being jet-lagged all the time, we never fully get used to it, because that daylight sun in the evening is always trying to drag our bodies back to standard time,' Meeks said.
Permanent daylight saving time? Where efforts to 'lock the clocks' stand
He said there are negative health, work productivity and economic impacts to daylight saving time.
Rep. Mark McElroy, who represents areas near the Mississippi border, told the committee it might be confusing for people in that area when the time changes as they cross a state line.
'We have some cross, and you touched on it, and a lot of them work in Mississippi and Memphis, and they go back and forth,' McElroy said. 'It's really going to cause confusion in Helena with people working back and forth.'
McElroy and other legislators said this would be handled better at the federal level so that it is done across the county all at once.
Arkansas lawmakers say push for permanent Daylight-Saving Time bill is bipartisan
Meeks said he has no plans to try again because he is term-limited.
'I do have colleagues in the chamber who have expressed continued support for this and so my hope is the next generation of lawmakers will pick up the mantle and continue to work forward on this issue,' Meeks said.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
37 minutes ago
- USA Today
Senate keeps provision curbing judge's orders in Donald Trump's budget bill
Senate keeps provision curbing judge's orders in Donald Trump's budget bill Some of Trump's fellow Republicans said they wouldn't have supported the provision if they had known it was in the House-passed measure, but it remains in the Senate draft of the legislation. Show Caption Hide Caption House passes President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' The House passed President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' It will now move onto the Senate. The Senate version of Trump's legislative priorities keeps a provision that experts say threatens the enforcement of court orders against the government. Trump has complained about judges blocking his policies. The provision would require litigants to post bonds before judges could enforce their orders. WASHINGTON – A controversial provision in the House-passed version of President Donald Trump's package of legislative priorities, which critics warn would hinder the enforcement of court orders, remains in the Senate version of the bill. The head of the Judiciary Committee, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, released his draft of the legislation June 13 that included the provision that Trump requested to combat court orders blocking his policies. Some fellow Republicans in the narrowly divided Congress have said they would oppose the bill over the provision or that it would be removed through a parliamentary maneuver. But its inclusion in the Senate draft reflects the support of leadership to include and defend it. Legislation would require litigants to post bonds before courts could enforce orders The provision would require judges to collect bonds from litigants challenging the government before blocking policies through injunctions or temporary restraining orders. Without a bond, the provision would prevent judges from enforcing their orders through contempt proceedings. Judges have always been able to collect bonds in civil lawsuits, essentially to ensure that defendants are reimbursed if they eventually win their cases. But judges traditionally don't collect bonds in cases against the government because the disputes are over policy rather than money like in a lawsuit between two businesses. Trump and his Republican allies would like to change that. He signed a memo in March directing the Justice Department to ask for bonds in all civil cases against the administration. Judges have temporarily blocked dozens of his policies. If the legislation were enacted, it would undo those blocks until judges set bonds. Bonds could reach trillions of dollars in cases against government Judges could set a nominal bond of $1, according to legal experts. But if they set a larger bond that litigants couldn't afford, judges wouldn't be able to enforce their orders and the Trump administration could ignore them, experts said. In February, U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan refused a request from Trump's White House Office of Management Budget to require a bond from the National Council of Nonprofits when she blocked the government from freezing all federal grants. She said it could have required trillions of dollars because that was how much was at stake in the case but that OMB would suffer no monetary damage from the case. 'The court declines,' Alikhan wrote. Some GOP lawmakers opposed the provision they weren't aware was in House-passed bill If the Senate changes the legislation, the House would have to vote on the bill again. Some GOP lawmakers have voiced opposition to the provision at raucous town halls. Rep. Mike Flood, R-Nebraska, said May 27 he was unaware of the provision and didn't support it when he voted for the bill. The House approved the bill on a 215-214 vote, so any potential loss of support could hurt the bill's chances. Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, said May 30 the bond provision 'will not be' in the Senate-approved bill because she expected it to be removed by the parliamentarian under a rule requiring everything in the legislation to have an impact on the budget.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Gen Z-led group launches $3M in youth voter mobilization
A Gen Z-led group aligned with Democrats is launching a $3 million youth voter mobilization effort ahead of next year's midterms. The group Voters of Tomorrow said the effort, shared first with The Hill, will target 18 competitive House districts across the country. The push is aimed at providing 'training, stipends, and support to empower campus organizers to engage their peers directly in districts where young voters have the power to decide the outcome,' according to a press release from the group. Among the House districts being targeted are California's 13th, 45th and 47th Congressional Districts; Nebraska's 2nd District; New York's 1st District; and Colorado's 8th District, among others. Most of the districts are rated as 'toss-up' by election forecasters at the non-partisan Cook Political Report. The effort shows how some Democratic-aligned organizations are already making early investments to win back some of the young voters the party lost to President Trump in the November election. A report from the Democratic data firm Catalist found the Democratic Party last year saw a 6-point drop in support among voters ages 18 to 29 compared to 2020, from 61 percent to 55 percent. Among young men, the decline was 9 points. The House's slim majority offers Democrats their best chance at flipping one of the chambers, with the Senate map offering a more challenging terrain. 'To stop Trump's dangerous agenda, we need to take back the House. Student voters have the numbers to flip key races, yet too often we're overlooked by major funders,' said Kaya Jones, programming director at Voters of Tomorrow, in a statement. 'We're proud to be making this necessary investment in young people, and we urge others to follow our lead. The future is on the ballot and so are we.'
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
US Senate seeks to add expanded compensation for nuclear radiation victims to tax bill
WASHINGTON (AP) — A program to compensate people exposed to radiation from past nuclear weapons testing and manufacturing could be restarted and expanded under a provision added by U.S. senators to the major tax and budget policy bill. The language added Thursday to the Senate version of the massive tax bill would overhaul the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, which was originally enacted in 1990 and expired about a year ago. The law compensated people in about a dozen western states who developed serious illnesses from nuclear testing and manufacturing stemming from World War II-era efforts to develop the atomic bomb. The new Senate provision would expand the coverage to states including Missouri and Tennessee, among other places. It would also cover a wider range of illnesses. The program's limited scope in the West has led Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri to push for its expansion to include uranium sites in St. Louis and victims in other states. His advocacy led the Senate to twice pass a major overhaul of the program, but it stalled in the U.S. House amid concerns about its cost. Without an agreement over the program's scope in Congress, the program lapsed. Hawley said the new language compensates many more people, but at a far lower cost than previous legislation. 'These folks deserve to be recognized for the sacrifices they made and compensated when the government has poisoned them without telling them, without helping them, without making it right," Hawley said Friday. 'This is a chance, finally, to make it right.' Still, the new provision's pathway remains uncertain when the House considers the Senate's changes. While there is broad Senate support for the payments, it is unclear how the addition of Hawley's legislation will be received by cost-conscious Republicans as they barrel toward a self-imposed July 4 deadline for the overall tax bill. House leaders are waiting to see what comes out of the Senate before deciding whether they might make further changes or simply try to pass the Senate bill and send it to President Donald Trump's desk. Lingering effects in Missouri St. Louis played a key role processing uranium as the United States developed a nuclear weapons program that was vital for winning World War II. But that effort exposed workers and nearby residents to radiation, with lingering issues remaining to this day. An elementary school was closed down a few years ago because of radioactive material found on site. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers remains years away from finishing environmental cleanup work. An investigation by The Associated Press, The Missouri Independent and MuckRock found the federal government and companies responsible for nuclear bomb production and atomic waste storage sites in the St. Louis area in the mid-20th century were aware of health risks, spills, improperly stored contaminants and other problems but often ignored them. Nuclear waste contaminated Coldwater Creek, and those who live nearby worry their cancers and other severe illnesses are connected. It's difficult to definitively link specific illnesses with the waste, but advocates for an expanded compensation program said there's evidence it made people sick years later. After the report by the AP and others, Hawley said sick St. Louis residents deserved help, too. He was joined by Dawn Chapman, co-founder of Just Moms STL, which brought attention to local nuclear contamination. She has called St. Louis a 'national sacrifice zone.' 'Many of us have had extreme amounts of devastation in the form of illnesses in our families,' Chapman said Friday. Expanding 'downwinder' eligibility The provision added Thursday would also expand coverage areas in several states for those exposed to radioactive contamination that blew downwind from government sites. In New Mexico, for example, advocates have sought to expand the program for people near the spot where the first Manhattan Project-era bomb was tested. These residents didn't know the blast was why ash had fallen. It poised water, crops and livestock. Attention for these 'downwinders' rose following the release of the film Oppenheimer. 'Our federal government has a moral responsibility to support Americans that helped defend our country — and it has a moral responsibility to include all people who were exposed. That begins with reauthorizing RECA and amending it to include those who have been left out for far too long,' said Sen. Martin Heinrich, Democrat of New Mexico. Prior to the addition of the radiation compensation measure, Hawley had so far withheld support for the overall tax package, questioning cuts to Medicaid programs and the potential effects on rural hospitals and low income residents. He said he still wants to see improvements in the package, but added that help for radiation victims was essential. 'It would be very hard for me to vote for a bill that doesn't include (the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act). This is extremely, extremely important to me," Hawley said.
