Government Military and Veterans Affairs

Competing daylight saving bills considered

Nebraskans would no longer reset their clocks twice a year under two proposals considered Jan. 31 by the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee.

Sen. Dave Murman
Sen. Dave Murman

LB302, sponsored by Glenvil Sen. Dave Murman, would eliminate observation of daylight saving time in Nebraska. Under the bill as introduced, the state would adopt the practice of permanent standard time upon adoption of the same policy by the neighboring states of Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota and Wyoming.

Murman brought an amendment to the hearing that would remove the contingency that neighboring states also adopt permanent standard time and instead would make the change effective upon passage of LB302.

Conversely, LB34, introduced by Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha, would adopt permanent daylight saving time. The switch would take effect contingent on a change in federal law or policy allowing states to do so and would require adoption of the same policy by three adjacent states.

States currently are allowed under federal law to permanently adopt year-round standard time — as Arizona and Hawaii have done — but Congress would have to act to authorize states to change to year-round daylight saving time.

Both senators said changing clocks twice a year has negative impacts on health, sleep, workplace safety and productivity, and that there is wide support in Nebraska for ending the practice.

Murman said his bill should be the preferred method to end time changes in Nebraska because it could be adopted immediately without having to wait for Congress to act. In addition, he said, many rural Nebraskans favor the proposal.

“The most compelling argument to me is that very shortly after I introduced this legislation, I received emails in support from Nebraska farmers, writing about how they would appreciate the extra morning sun,” Murman said.

Sen. Megan Hunt
Sen. Megan Hunt

Hunt said her personal preference is for more daylight hours in the evening, but that her primary concern is doing away with the time change — in whatever way senators decide to accomplish it.

“I’d just like to stop the madness,” she said.

Jay Pea, president of Save Standard Time, a nonprofit that advocates on behalf of permanent standard time, testified in support of LB302 and in opposition to LB34. Natural light is important for individuals whose jobs require them to be up early, he said, and that is what standard time provides.

“Standard time is the real, honest-to-God sundial time,” Pea said. “There are hundreds of studies across decades showing that standard time is best for our health, safety and our performance in school and the workplace.”

Speaking against LB34, Pea said permanent daylight saving time was tried twice nationally and was quickly reversed due to its unpopularity. Government-mandated time changes shouldn’t be used to favor a few industries that benefit from more daylight at certain times of year, he said.

Also testifying on both bills was Jason Jackson, who said the extra hour of sunlight during daylight saving time is a benefit to Nebraska families. Speaking in favor of LB34, he said the measure would expand opportunities for young people to participate in sports because of the additional sunlight at the end of the day.

“I know that for my own children, if they weren’t involved in sports after school, they’d probably be looking at screens the whole time,” Jackson said.

In his testimony against LB302, Jackson expressed concern that schools and workplaces would not adjust their schedules to align with permanent standard time. The result, he said, would be fewer parents who could get their kids to practice earlier in the day while the sun is still out.

Joe Kohout, testifying on behalf of the Nebraska Golf Alliance, also supported LB34 and opposed LB302. Adopting permanent standard time would adversely impact the more than 300 golf courses in Nebraska, he said, which earn between 35% and 40% of their revenue after 4 p.m.

Fewer evening hours of daylight would result in lost revenue, Kohout said, which likely would result in increased prices and less access to the sport for all Nebraskans.

The committee took no immediate action on either proposal.

Bookmark and Share
Share