The downside of making Daylight Saving Time permanent - CNN
This article critiques the U.S. House's push to make Daylight Saving Time permanent, citing historical failures and public dissatisfaction during the 1970s energy crisis. The author argues that the move is a populist reaction that ignores the practical downsides of permanent daylight hours.
Why it matters
The debate over permanent Daylight Saving Time highlights the tension between popular political sentiment and the practical, often unforeseen, consequences of legislative changes.
One of the most famous quotes about politics is Otto von Bismarck’s observation that it’s the “art of the possible.” But when it comes to Daylight Saving Time, a more apt version comes from economist John Kenneth Galbraith’s 1962 letter to President John F. Kennedy: “Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists in choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable.” Congress is yet again flirting with eliminating the United States’ twice-yearly ritual of changing the clocks by an hour — this time, by making Daylight Saving Time permanent. The House voted in favor of that change Tuesday by an overwhelming margin, 308-117. But in many ways, this issue epitomizes political populism run amok. Changing clocks is bad and we don’t like it? OK, then let’s just stop doing that! If the status quo is bad, then the alternative must be better.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in