U.S. Senate approves bill to make daylight saving time permanent

Yes, for most, it's the transition that is the stressor, but I am like you, in not being a morning person. Only thing is that my body's circadian clock doesn't work right, & doesn't adjust, with changes in the light. IOW, it won't matter if the electric clock is constant; When it says 10 A.M., that's not going to fool my body for a second-- it'll know & feel that it's only 9.

 

Well thanks for doing that that, and for passing along what you found. But why, then, do you think that the tiny, OP SNIP says "ending the twice-annual changing of clocks?..." What massive boner, if the news service had gotten the story wrong-- and we'd all remember it, twice a year: they'd never live it down!

 

While I also think it's a good thing to end the "clock changing nonsense", I do think that making Standard Time permanent would be the better way to go rather than making DST permanent.

 

Correct... Sunrise wouldn't occur until around 8:20am-ish.

I agree.

Same here. I'd rather have Standard Time be permanent.

Same here.

 

We should just do away with the DST bullsplatter altogether. Permanent Standard Time.

 

I would chalk it up to a poorly written article which led to a misinterpretation. I see that a lot these days. Take for instance HB 7 in Florida, aka Don't Say Gay Bill. When I replied originally, I concerned myself with the strictly Constititional issues at hand in the bill, namely freedom of Speech of Teachers and Students and that gender identification and sexual orientation is protected under the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Somehow, that thread got into that the bill was about sex education from kindergarden to thrid grade. No where does the bill state that. But we got there somehow.

It is always prudent to read the bill for yourself, especially if the article cites the bill. Most bills are pretty much straight forward although can can be long, very long at time. I don't read omnibus bills because I simply don't have the time nor inclination. Besides, budget bills will always have something that the other party does not agree with.

 

There's a disadvantage on this and that 7 am in the morning would be too dark to send the kids to school. There could be unexplained accidents namely kids getting run over by cars and busses and possibly trains. Daylight would come too late in the morning. How would explain it?

 

We don't have it in WA. We trialled it but people didn't see the benefit and couldn't be arsed changing the clocks.

I guess we could all decide to work different hours seasonally. That would have the same effect.

 

I prefer whichever one has the light earlier instead of later. I cant go to bed when its not dark out, but I have no problem in when its light out!

But I'll happily settle for either as long as it doesnt change all the damn time.

 

I guess one can think about taking those kind of chances with the precious cargo known as our school kids.

 

What bill did you read?

This bill is stuck in the House, and the text looks to be the same in both versions:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/623/text
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/69/text

It ends the practice of changing the clocks and shifts all US standard timezones one hour to the East.

This then makes DST permanent all year.

I like it.

 

That's not worded right, is it?

If you can't go to bed when it's not dark out then isn't that the same thing as writing I can go to bed when it is dark out?

 

Our politicians always know what's best for us, and all their legislative acts are based upon reflection and knowledge. They are brilliant in their deliberations and legislation, and all the world knows that.

Having lived all my life in Florida, I can remember when there was no DST in this state. When it began it was just 4 months worth, which isn't bad in the summer time. Then our illustrious leaders bumped it to 6 months, and then to 8 months out of 12. Pure nonsense.

In my county, several children have been killed going to the bus stop when it is still dark at 7AM. The children's sleeping patterns are grossly disturbed by having DST running for 8 months out of 12, and if it goes to 12 out of 12 that will be aggravated further.

Our illustrious politicians pay only lip service to caring for the children. They inject them with toxins now, and deprive them of sleep necessary for their growing bodies and minds.

But hey, our politicians have only our best interests at heart, right?

 

Thats correct, I can go to bed more easily when its dark out and its a lot harder for me to go to bed when its not dark out.

 

Yeah, me too for the most part. It makes more sense to me to just repeal the 1966 DST law and leave the 1918 law alone, but I personally prefer longer afternoon sun than roughly equal sun before and afternoon.

 

Then surely the children would be going home in the dark which is just as dangerous?

Anyway, looks like the OP conclusion was wrong judging by some comments. Personally, I would favour not having any clock changing and move the time by half an hour as a compromise

 

I love it.

 

It gets dark at 3PM??

 

in my country it does and probably does in some parts of the northern parts of the US

 

Where do you live? Greenland?

BTW, I wonder if there's daylight savings time in Greenland?

 

We don't have it in WA, seems to work just fine without it.

It's one of those issues I don't care about at all. Not even in the slightest. I couldn't care less if we have it or don't have it, the only downside I see is that I'd have to spend 30 seconds changing my clocks every now and then.