[Note to mods: I really tried to think of the correct forum for this post, but I really couldn’t decide. So I placed it here, but I wouldn’t be surprised if you can think of a better forum.]
Today the Senate unanimouslyapproved a bill that would make DST permanent starting next year. It seems to me that if the Senate approved it unanimously, then the House is likewise sure to approve it by a wide margin at least, but even if it passes the House by a single vote, that would be enough since a simple majority is sufficient. And assuming the House does pass it, will Biden sign the bill?
I know this has been debated for generations without any definitive resolution, so I’m very surprised to see this happening now. Or have there been earlier efforts to enact permanent DST that got equally far, but got sunk in the end?
The obvious problem with permanent DST is that it as it would mean dark mornings in the northern states. Despite this, Oregon, Washington, and California have all signed onto a pact which would make DST permanent if the federal government approves. And now it looks like it’s going to happen. Or is it? What are the implications of today’s vote?
The prospect of permanent DST looks a lot different from San Diego or Miami than it does from Seattle or Portland.
That the senate passed it unanimously is a little shocking. Hard to think they’d ever 100% agree on something.
Pelosi is “looking at it.” I take that to mean she is waiting for moneyed interests who care to show themselves and lobby the House (write checks) for reasons it should not happen.
Which makes me curious. Are there any businesses who give a shit about this? Given that the senate was A-Ok with this I am not sure anyone out there wants to fight this.
Although my GF did express concern about waking up in the dark. Does that count?
I live in NW Montana, about 190 miles south of the US/Canadian border. Even if it inconveniences me a little I would still like to see it happen. Resetting the clocks twice a year has to stop, even if it means my morning dog walks will be darker in the winter than they used to be. I’m in!
It’s about the same for Eugene, only it’s about ten minutes earlier. I’m surprised that the latest sunrise is almost two weeks after the solstice, but that’s what my astronomy app tells me.
There was a piece on the radio here in Vancouver, WA recently that discussed this. Ski resorts were one industry that opposed it since it’d apparently force workers to perform some of their early morning duties in the dark.
The fire chiefs association??? There goes the change your clock change your smoke / CO detector battery reminders.
I know many models are going to 10-yr lithium batteries but those kind of scare me more as how many people will forget to change/replace them after that long of not having to think about them?
For a long time I’ve been puzzled by this attitude. Why in the world do so many people want the stopping of the time change to go only towards DST, not away from it?
I agree that the semi-annual time change should be stopped, but the only sensible way is to drop DST altogether.
I’m guessing people would rather have more daylight in the evening. Getting up in the dark kinda sucks but we are more active later in the day and more daylight then is better. We all know we get the same hours of sunlight. The question is where they are best used.
If they’re going to scrap the system and “go back to God’s time”, why are they choosing to make DST permanent instead of making Standard Time permanent? Heck, why not chuck the whole system out and go back to each locale setting their clocks for local high noon?
Incremental approach: Set clocks forward 3 minutes a day (or 21 minutes once each week) for half the year, then set clocks back likewise the other half of the year.
Congress should decree an extra hour in each day, with the stipulation that it be a daylight hour.
From the OP:
“The obvious problem with permanent DST is that it as it would mean dark mornings in the northern states.”
This clearly suggests we should have horizontal time zones rather than vertical ones: A Southern zone, a Mid-Latitudes zone, and a Northern zone.
If we’d behave more like Farmer Joe and get up at 5AM every morning, and go to bed at 9PM, then noon being when the sun is overhead makes sense. But right now, it’s just arbitrary numbers on your phone’s home screen, we could use a 24 hour clock and count from 5AM for all the difference it makes. We just all have to agree on a time. Businesses open at 9AM or 10AM and close at 7PM or 10PM, so the more sunlight during that time, the more sense it makes.
Time zones are confusing enough - having to adjust schedules for where the time changes and doesn’t, and when it changes, affects anyone doing anything interstate like airlines and train schedules, TV programming (remember when we watched something when it was actually on?) and similar scheduling.- it would be simpler if the time didn’t jump around. Fortunately, we all agree what date it changes, that lack of coordination would be an additional nightmare.
The original logic was also about how much electricity it saved, back in the days when lighting was incandescent and actually used a significant amount of power. This is a much less relevant reason today.
The earliest sunset is around Dec 10, about 11 days before the solstice. You’d think that would be symetrical with the latest sunrise. That is, the same number of days before as after. I expect Earth’s perigee (somewhere around Jan 4) causes the asymetry.
I am not a farmer but I went to school with a bunch of kids who grew up on a farm. They told me day light savings was crap. Farmers work on their animals’ schedules. Didn’t matter what the clock said.
Sun comes up, sun goes down. Doesn’t matter what time you call it.
