Merge – Daylight Savings Time

[Calamata (Zee)]

Daylight Savings Time – No More Switching

The following proposals are all proposals to stop time switching twice a year. They are either in favor of eliminating Daylight Savings Time (DST) or of making it permanent, but all want to stop the twice-yearly time change. I propose that the following 8 policy proposals about daylight savings time be merged:

1 – Eliminate DST

Written by @Benwa10

Get rid of daylight savings time (DST)

Repeal daylight savings time. Such a repeal will prevent the drop in productivity and the negative health effects experienced by people as they yearly adjust their sleep schedules to changed time. In a modern society, our agricultural sector can adjust to fewer hours of daylight by setting alarms for themselves and adjusting employees’ hours, without the disruption caused for their fellow Americans. It would lessen confusion for international and national common carriers. It would receive broad,…

2 – Eliminate DST

Written by @mr_jay_pea

Ditch Daylight Saving Time, Restore Permanent Standard Time

Ditch Daylight Saving Time (fast time) and restore permanent Standard Time (natural time), for the health, mood, safety, education, and economy of schoolchildren, commuters, farmers, construction workers, and more. Permanent Standard Time alone can end clock change quickly, safely, and fairly, as most people wish. It can do so without delaying sunrise, for well-being and prosperity. Permanent Standard Time has been observed for decades in Arizona, Hawaii, all five US territories, and most natio…

3 – Eliminate DST

Written by @Katherine41

Repeal Daylight Savings Time

Repeal daylight savings time. Such a repeal will prevent the drop in productivity and the negative health effects experienced by people as they yearly adjust their sleep schedules to changed time. In a modern society, our agricultural sector can adjust to fewer hours of daylight by setting alarms for themselves and adjusting employees’ hours, without the disruption caused for their fellow Americans. It would lessen confusion for international and national common carriers. It would receive broad,…

4 – Eliminate DST

Written by @Leb

Daylight savings time

Get rid of daylight savings time it’s not good for our health it put stress on the heart when we jump from time to time our elderly need light to drive and night so they are confined to their house more with depression so prevalent sunlight does help that. It’s not right that they passed it in the Senate a couple years ago and then it didn’t pass the house because of other issues, and it was lumped with other things we are tired of not being taken care of, and only used as a bartering chip. Thi…

5 – Eliminate DST

Written by @Laurachapman89

Eliminate daylight savings time

Get rid of daylight savings time it’s so outdated and terrible for young children adjusting. This would be beneficial for children to have consistent schedules and easier on the parents being forced to adjust them two times per year. It works not having it in Arizona and Hawaii and it needs to happen throughout the entire US. There is no point to having this still in 2024. It affects children in the classroom adjusting constantly they do not experience much daylight to play outdoors after school…

6 – Eliminate DST

Written by @PriceIsRight

Make Daylights Savings Time Permanent

Take away daylights saving time federally Remove the “fall back” (November time change) As a clinical health coach for over 7 years, it was automatic to see mental health concerns rise when daylights savings time took effect in November. This originally was set up for farmers. I can speak as a resident in Iowa all my life, there is not a single farmer that benefits from daylights savings time. Our equipment comes with lights and every kind of bell and whistle now on equipment. The benefit is …

7 – Make DST Permanent

Written by @Mannyhandy897

Make daylight saving time year round

Put a stop to the back and forth of the clocks twice a year. Let’s turn the clocks forward one last time in March of 2025 and then never change them again. There has not been any opposition to this in the past that I’ve found credible, a few States such as Florida and Arizona do not even recognize daylight savings time. Daylight savings has a negative impact to our health and for all intensive purposes is completely useless. With now many people working from home, the prior arguments from 200…

8 – Ambiguous on DST, but No Switching

Written by @Brandon

Daylight savings year round

Put a stop to the back and forth of the clocks twice a year. Let’s turn the clocks forward one last time in March of 2025 and then never change them again. There has not been any opposition to this in the past that I’ve found credible, a few States such as Florida and Arizona do not even recognize daylight savings time. Daylight savings has a negative impact to our health and for all intensive purposes is completely useless. With now many people working from home, the prior arguments from 200…

Explanation & Justification

These 8 proposals address the removal of, or the making permanent, daylight savings time. In each case, the argument is in favor of stopping twice-yearly time changes.

Proposals 1 and 2 have a lot of useful detail about the impacts of DST and why it should be eliminated. Proposals 3, 4, 5, and 6 are related requests but do not include detailed plans. Proposal 7 is in favor of making DST permanent. Proposal 8 is ambiguous on making DST permanent or removing it, but is in favor of not switching times twice a year.

[mr_jay_pea (Jay Pea)]

STRONG OPPOSE

We cannot merge proposals for permanent Standard Time (elimination of Daylight Saving Time) with proposals for permanent DST (elimination of Standard Time), as these are exact opposites.

History, science, and common sense show permanent DST is worse than biannual clock change. Permanent Standard Time is the healthier, safer, and fairer policy.

As an analogy: Standard Time is like drinking water every day, and DST is like getting drunk on alcohol (or another vice or drug) every day. We hurt when we start DST (spring forward), we hurt as we continue it, and we may hurt temporarily when we stop (fall back). When we have a substance-abuse problem, the solution is not to adopt it permanently, the solution is to stop it.

The healthful solution to DST is not to extend DST permanently into winter, but rather we should return to alignment of civil clocks to circadian rhythms, via permanent Standard Time. For details as to why, please read the linked posts.

COUNTER-PROPOSAL

Merge as “End DST, Make Standard Time Permanent”:

• Get rid of daylight savings time
• Ditch Daylight Saving Time, Restore Permanent Standard Time
• Repeal Daylight Savings Time
• Eliminate daylight savings time

Merge as “End Standard Time, Make DST Permanent”:

• Make daylight saving time year round
• Daylight savings year round

Merge as “End Clock Change, Make Either Standard Time or DST Permanent”:

• Daylight savings time
• Eliminate Daylights Savings Time

[pat_kingsley (Patrick Kingsley)]

I agree with Jay. It matters which clock we observe year-round, and there is abundant evidence that eliminating DST in favor of Standard Time would be the best option.

[Calamata (Zee)]

BOTH are for stoping the clock switching.

I think there’s discussion to be had on which one to keep - Daylight savings or Standard time. I’m down with stopping switching, but I don’t currently have an opinion on which is better and would like to learn from both sides before I do.

I see no reason we can’t hash out if Daylight Savings or Standard Time is the better no-switching solution in the conversation.

But if you prefer, we can make two merge threads - one for keeping Daylight Savings Time and one for Standard Time.

I don’t think that gets everyone in the same conversation nearly as well, and it won’t lead to everyone getting in on the same answer - just two opposing camps (and we know NOTHING gets done when we just have two opposing camps.)

Plus it splits the vote on the “no more time switching” topic, lowering it in the overall visibility and support count.

But I’ve already had my say… I think we should round up everyone on one thread and work out which time from that single arena.
If you think we should enshrine two camps with their own already-decided echo-chamber constituents, instead of getting everyone together to wrangle with it and win hearts and minds… OK.

I take as my example, the R’s and the D’s who can’t work out ANYTHING together from their own enshrined camps.
As opposed to MAGA/MAHA who don’t care what your pre-defined conditions are, they’re just in it together to find practical solutions.

For that reason, I “STRONGLY OPPOSE” two threads, instead of uniting in one.
But ultimately it’s up to the moderators.

[mr_jay_pea (Jay Pea)]

BOTH are for stoping the clock switching.

There are three core proposals, so I’m unsure what is meant by “both”.

I see no reason we can’t hash out if Daylight Savings or Standard Time is the better no-switching solution in the conversation.

Because permanent DST is worse than the status quo of clock changing, especially regarding natural health (#MAHA).

If you think we should enshrine two camps with their own already-decided echo-chamber constituents, instead of getting everyone together to wrangle with it and win hearts and minds… OK.

I don’t believe this is a fair characterization.

[Calamata (Zee)]

@mr_jay_pea

There are three core proposals, so I’m unsure what is meant by “both”.

Unless I missed something, there are Two Core Proposals:

• Make standard time permanent
• Make daylight savings time permanent

There’s no need for a “keep switching between the two” because that’s the existing policy and practice and doesn’t need anything from us. If that were the case we’d just end up voting down the whole idea of a new policy and go with the status quo.

@mr_jay_pea

Because permanent DST is worse than the status quo of clock changing, especially regarding natural health (#MAHA).

That’s the proposal you’re bringing. It may be the best option, but that’s not what the merge is for.
And it is not everyone’s opinion, evidence that there’s 1 (or maybe 2, since one is ambiguous) proposals for the opposite.

The purpose of the merge isn’t to pick a winner. I’m just looking at merging what’s in the 8 daylight savings times proposals and not exercising a veto by virtue of how the merge is done.

The merge process isn’t intended to select one option, only to get all the conversation in one place.

@mr_jay_pea

If you think we should enshrine two camps with their own already-decided echo-chamber constituents, instead of getting everyone together to wrangle with it and win hearts and minds… OK.

I don’t believe this is a fair characterization.

You are asking for ONLY one option (Standard Time Only) to be in this merge (6 threads). That’s one camp.
You are asking for the OTHER option (Daylight Savings Time Only) to be excluded from this discussion (2 threads). That’s the other camp.

That’s what I’m talking about.

My position is that BOTH sides ALREADY AGREE that we should NOT be switching times twice a year - we should have ONE time basis and it shouldn’t shift back and forth. That’s the big tent where we already have people in agreement.

It’s always easier to discuss solutions, get thoughtful consideration, and forge a common solution if you start on ground where people already agree.

Then the point of the discussions in the merged thread become wrangling with the pros and cons of the choices, you can pitch the value of your ideas , and we can test what’s the best solutions and bring (most) everyone to agreement(ish).

With everyone in one thread, you get the oportunity to convince the other side of the wisdom of your Standard Only proposal… because they’re already here.

I think that big-tent start-where-we-agree strategy holds better hope for getting people on the same page than two separate camps with opposing plans.

That’s my case for merge-to-one-proposal, instead of merge-to-two-opposite-proposals.

But the Merge choice isn’t mine, it’s the administrators.

[mr_jay_pea (Jay Pea)]

There are three core proposals, so I’m unsure what is meant by “both”.

Unless I missed something, there are Two Core Proposals:

• Make standard time permanent
• Make daylight savings time permanent

The third proposal would be “Make Either Standard Time or Daylight Saving Time Permanent”.

Because permanent DST is worse than the status quo of clock changing, especially regarding natural health (#MAHA).

That’s the proposal you’re bringing.

That is the proposal brought by these four posts (one of which I authored):

• Get rid of daylight savings time
• Ditch Daylight Saving Time, Restore Permanent Standard Time
• Repeal Daylight Savings Time
• Eliminate daylight savings time

That is also the professional, scientific, and medical opinion of almost all who study this issue, including, for example (links to each group’s statement can be read by clicking each name), the Society for Research on Biological Rhythms, Sleep Research Society, National Sleep Foundation, American Academy of Sleep Medicine, editorial boards of Bloomberg, Star Tribune, Oregonian, Sun Sentinel, and many more.

We all rank the three options for moving forward as this (which I will label arbitrarily as “A”):

1. Permanent Standard Time
2. Status Quo (Biannual Clock Change)
3. Permanent DST

In contrast, regrettably there are other individuals who would rank the options instead as this (arbitrarily labeled “B”):

1. Permanent DST
2. Status Quo (Biannual Clock Change)
3. Permanent Standard Time

That is the proposal of these two posts:

• Make daylight saving time year round
• Daylight savings year round

And finally, there is a third group of individuals who would rank the options as follows (arbitrarily “C”):

1. Equally Permanent Standard Time or Permanent Standard Time
2. Status Quo (Biannual Clock Change)

And that is the proposal of these two posts:

• Daylight savings time
• Eliminate Daylights Savings Time

A and B oppose each other. C allies with A and with B.

It may be the best option, but that’s not what the merge is for.

To merge all three groups into one is unfair, it is misrepresentative, and it does not Make America Healthy Again.

And it is not everyone’s opinion, evidence that there’s 1 (or maybe 2, since one is ambiguous) proposals for the opposite.

And that is why I oppose merging those opposite opinions into one proposal, exactly because A and B are in opposition.

…and not exercising a veto by virtue of how the merge is done.

Your meaning here is unclear to me, if you might explain further, thank you.

You are asking for ONLY one option (Standard Time Only) to be in this merge (6 threads). That’s one camp. You are asking for the OTHER option (Daylight Savings Time Only) to be excluded from this discussion (2 threads). That’s the other camp.

No, I have asked that we not merge two opposite proposals together into one, as that would not make sense to do, it would be unfair and misrepresentative, and it would not MAHA.

Additionally, I offer a counter-proposal, to merge the eight posts into three posts. This would still reduce the number of posts, and it could increase clarity, without betraying the wishes of participants.

My position is that BOTH sides ALREADY AGREE that we should NOT be switching times twice a year…

I apologize, but that is simply not the case. And that is why the status quo is the current policy, it is a non-ideal compromise. I have been working professionally on this issue for several years. I wish it were easier. You might read more at the following link. Thank you.

Ditch Daylight Savings Time - Coalition for Permanent Standard Time

[EastTNLady]

I agree with Jay Pea. These are TWO very different proposals. I CANNOT vote for any proposal to end changing the clocks if it includes an option for permanent DST. I would rather keep switching back and forth than to have it mostly dark until around 9 am, or maybe later, in the winter. The ideas need to remain separate so people can vote for the one they like. If they don’t care which way we leave the clocks as long as we stop changing them, then they can vote for both. I vote for returning to permanent Standard Time, as that is more closely aligned with solar time.

[jeffryer]

I completely agree with Jay that keeping standard time is the way to go. After learning how bad it is to change times I was initially happy to stop changing with either standard or daylight. But after digging into it and learning more, I now understand that permanent DST is clearly the worst option. Changing times like we do now is actually better. But hands down the best solution is permanent standard time. We should aim to align our clocks with natural, sun based time. This is the best for everyone s health and the most logical. If folks like to have more daylight in the afternoon, then just go to work earlier, no need to change the time.

[Calamata (Zee)]

So the point of proposing this merge was to get all the conversation in one place, not to argue which position is best which seems to be where most folks want to take it.

Honestly I don’t care enough about which way it goes to do this conversation one more time, and having tried to draw it back to the point “what to merge” several times now without significantly redirecting the course of the discussion, I’m done.

The point of merge isn’t to pick a winner. It’s to reduce the noise, raise visibility, and get people discussing things in one more collected group.

I proposed the merge to REDUCE the number of threads where “the right answer” gets discussed, not to create yet another one.

I leave it with the moderator.

[mr_jay_pea (Jay Pea)]

So the point of proposing this merge was to get all the conversation in one place, not to argue which position is best which seems to be where most folks want to take it.

I appreciate that intention, but now we are discussing the matter in two additional places.

Why not reword this merge proposal? Its title “No More Switching” is not what six of the eight posts seek.

Roughly a third of the US population wants pST, but will accept the status quo over pDST. Another third wants pDST, but will accept the status quo over pST. The final third wants either pST or pDST, and opposes the status quo. This is why the status quo remains.

And that’s still not to mention the fact that every health org and expert advises against pDST and endorses pST a naturally more aligned with circadian rhythms. Shouldn’t we come together on what is naturally healthy? #MAHA

[Calamata (Zee)]

Sure. Although you’ve still missed my point that the reason for suggesting the merge was to get EVERYONE in the same discussion to reach / teach / educate / influence and find agreement on a strategy.

I edited the title. It now says “DAYLIGHT SAVINGS TIME”.
I’m still not picking a side.

1. The majority of proposals want to stop switching. They just differ on which direction.
2. The point of the merge wasn’t to dictate “The Right” answer, but to consolidate discussion so that collectively the community could come to an understanding and agreement on the ideal course.
3. Of course we should pick the one which supports MAHA, but isn’t that the point of consolidating discussion? So people can work together, through rational discussion, to educate, challenge each other, bring information, and then through civil discourse, come to a conclusion on what’s the best strategy, in a way that utilizes the opportunity to bring stakeholders along, persuades people through teaching / discussing, and that gets buy-in from the majority of participants?

If the purpose of this forum is to just propose multiple sets of strongly held views, in pairs (or dozens) of opposing proposals, HOW do you think we’ll come to any agreements that we can get a movement behind?

If we put

• all the pro-DST people in one room, so they can agree and buttress each other,
• and all the pro-StandardTime people in another room, so they can agree and buttress each other,
• and all the people who just want to stop switching and don’t care which way in a third room, so they can agree and buttress each other,
• and all the people who like switching in a fourth room, so they can agree and buttress each other,

you just end up with four entrenched opposing camps.

Unless you’re going to put them together for discussion, and the chance to influence, inform, challenge, converse, and consider opposing views, HOW do you get enough agreement to make anything roll in one direction or another?

You simply end up with 4 sets of solidly entrenched folks defending their opinions.

If you have entrenched groups, and you want to move in ANY direction, either

• one group has to bully the other groups into submission,
• or override their position by sheer numbers without getting their buy-in.

Or you can’t move forward at all - you just get the status quo.

Which is pretty much where we are now in this country.
Bullying, overriding, and - at best - status quo.

Honestly, if this forum is about getting all the one-side-of-the-opinion like-minded folks each into their own separate threads, and NOT about getting them to work together for a common solution… what is the point?

That’s what democrats and republicans have been doing for generations. It isn’t working out well.

The whole power of MAGA+MAHA is that we’ve brought together groups with different opinions of how things should go and they’re working it out together for the greater good based on being able to tolerate, experience, explore, listen, converse, and find common ground.

It’s not based on one group giving up their opinions and adopting the strongly-held opposing position’s views.

If we can’t even get people who care about daylight savings time together in ONE THREAD to work out the discussion - without insisting in advance what the RIGHT answer is - HOW are we ever going to get anything more important than daylight savings time resolved?

---

There has to be a paradigm shift.

Fostering one-opinion camps with each camp putting forth their echo-chamber we-all-agree-we’re-right-and-you’re-wrong ideas has failed us to the point where we’re about to lose this country.

Allowing one group to override all others with their “Right Answer” because they have the power to do so WITHOUT seeking the conversation, seeing the other side’s view, or developing buy-in has been an unmitigated disaster.

I don’t see how having opposing threads of “pro-DST” - “pro-StandardTime” - “pro-Switching” gets ANYONE nearer to agreement.

---

This attempt-to-merge thread is a microcosm of how the forum functions as a whole.

I thought we had a new paradigm working here, but now I’m fairly convinced its just another arena where people pick their favorite beliefs, entrench with folks who already agree with them, declare themselves to have “the right answer”, and shove any dissenters out the door.

NOT why I showed up. So perhaps I was wrong about what we’re doing here.

---

PS: Do you know who scares me most? People who insist they have “The Right Answer” and want to dump their right answers on others without engaging in any conversation with people who have oposing, or just different, opinions. Because if those “right-answer” people have the power to, they will enforce their “right answer” on you regardless of what you want, or what you decide is best for you and yours.

When my point is “everyone bring your case and lets all discuss the options and see if we can find agreement” and the replies I get are “No No THIS is the ONLY RIGHT ANSWER and those other people should be put in a different thread” … well I’m just not seeing any new paradigm happening here.

I’m going to go think about the way this is working, and if its worth my investing my time and passion in. This isn’t my house, so I don’t get to set the rules. However if its just more of the same contentious us-vs-them my-ideas-over-here and your-ideas-over-there, I think it misses the spirit of what MAGA+MAHA is doing.

---

<Leaving this to the moderators now. Merge, don’t merge, multi-thread merge. You choose. I’m done.>

[iBringBalance (Marcos B)]

I’ll merge into 2 topics, make DST permanent & eliminate DST, as soon as I can figure out how to do it

I’ve long been following @mr_jay_pea & he’s deeply knowledgeable on the subject, I don’t think we can combine into 1

I agree it would be great to get everyone on the same page - from my experience, it’s not possible

Both sides feel pretty strongly, even though the scientific evidence is fully supporting eliminating DST - most of the science agrees that making DST permanent would actually be worse than switching (& history shows that too; both Russia & the US tried permanent DST)

[Calamata (Zee)]

You will want to search for additional threads as it seems to be a hot topic and I think there are more threads now than when I started this merge suggestion.

[Extremist (Curtis Johnson)]

I will add a voice to “merge in to one”.

The crux of the issue is that there is one problem with competing solutions. Most agree there is a problem. By keeping the arguments in independent silo’s an outside observer is more inclined to agree with the first thread they find, rather than the one with the best arguments and evidence.

It promotes gamesmanship of activity levels to keep your topic “newer/hotter/fresher” so it is presented to that observer. In essence, dividing the topic promotes spam. Merging promotes educated decisions.

This is agnostic of the topic at hand. The metagame must be considered.

[iBringBalance (Marcos B)]

The problem is: how would such a policy be worded?

If it’s worded such that it says “end clock change”, well that already passed in the senate:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/03/15/senate-daylight-saving-permanent/

But they couldn’t agree on which way; as for permanent daylight savings, that happened in 1973:

Permanent time observation in the United States

& was an absolute disaster

I think what makes the most sense is to make sure each topic is linked from the other, but keep it to 2 policy proposals

[Calamata (Zee)]

@Extremist

The crux of the issue is that there is one problem with competing solutions.

@Extremist

This is agnostic of the topic at hand. The metagame must be considered.

Thank you for understanding what I’ve been trying to get to all along.

[Extremist (Curtis Johnson)]

@iBringBalance

The problem is: how would such a policy be worded?

Are you asking for the title, or the body? The title is simple - Lock the Clocks. Remember we are dealing with politicos who want to have a catchy header for all their pet project bills and a public whose attention you wish to gain. Again, think metagame.

The body is also simple. The header paragraph details a problem that exists and that there are competing solutions, to lock standard time and to lock savings time. That one must be selected as the policy position, citing this exact past failure in '73. Provide a brief for each detailing the major points. The elevator pitch. Lead with Standard Time’s position as that is the historical default clock setting. Ideally have a proponent of each give a detailed response in the thread which is linked from the OP. Here you can link however many studies and examples as required to flesh out the argumentation.

Encourage the reader to support the most cogent and coherent policy position with a

Without a merge there is no informed consensus. Just silo’d exposure to half arguments.

[Extremist (Curtis Johnson)]

To this end, let me bang up an introduction. I am NOT an expert in this field, just an observer in passing. Expect some of this to be factually wrong and in need of revision:

Lock the Clocks: Selecting Standard or Savings Time.

As modern time pieces were introduced we based our time system off the sun itself. Time keeping proved critical throughout the industrial revolution and the advent of the electrical age. With electricity came artificial lighting, allowing us to work independently of sunlight.

At this time, industrialists pushed to optimize productivity by making maximum use of sunlight, with the benefit of electrical lighting and accurate time keeping, by shifting the time relative to the sun by one hour. This was capitalized on during World War 1, as the combatants adopted Daylight Savings Time to conserve the fuel, the energy, used in lighting. It would reappear in World War 2 and be applied inconsistently until Congress passed the Uniform Time Act of 1966. From here, most states adopted the Spring Forward (Savings Time) - Fall Back (Standard Time) system.

This dual system has proven itself an irritation of marginal benefit, and has garnered increasing criticism for its affects on health. One clock ought to be set. The options are the traditional Standard Time, which optimizes human health and behavior, or Savings Time, which optimizes energy efficiency. Here we gather both options, please read through each and offer your support.

[iBringBalance (Marcos B)]

But how to offer support?

Voting is a clear way to do that, as you get an aggregate count

How do you get a count for “support optimizes human health”?

That is the benefit of 2 topics, as the vote count clearly indicates those for “optimizing human health” vs “optimizing waking up early”