[tz] Tzdb and the Sunshine Protection Act

[Doug Ewell]

Brooks Harris wrote:

> Apparently there is still debate of "permanent DST" v.s. "permanent
> standard time". Many arguments have been made for "permanent standard
> time" but amongst them is no discussion or recognition of the
> potential technical difficulties, disruptions, and costs associated
> with "permanent DST".  I would think the major implementers would be
> very concerned about this. I'm guessing all industries, from finance
> to transportation, would be affected and many don't realize the
> difficulties and costs they may face to adapt to the change.

<flame>

We have spent decades — for many of us, our entire lives — changing the clocks regularly every spring and fall, and only in the last few years have I become aware that this is somehow a tremendous burden and a massive inconvenience for me and everyone else.

Having self-evidently settled the debate that changing the clocks is a terrible thing and a national priority, the only solution being formally presented is to shift our time zones 15° east year-round. No amount of evidence about the failed experiment in 1974, and the schoolchildren killed in early-morning accidents, seems to convince anyone. It seems unlikely that appeals to technical difficulties would convince these people either, as long as the golf and Halloween candy industries can be shown to turn a greater profit, and as long as flawed studies showing supposed energy savings can be produced.

Marco Rubio is behind this bill, and he had never shied away from claiming that he or Florida represent the entire United States, so I don’t know why the DST situation should be any different.

</flame>

Sorry about that. I feel better now.

--
Doug Ewell, CC, ALB | Lakewood, CO, US | ewellic.org