BILL ANALYSIS 1
1
SENATE ENERGY, UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE
DEBRA BOWEN, CHAIRWOMAN
AJR 56 - Longville Hearing
Date: June 13, 2000 A
As Introduced: March 29, 2000 NON-FISCAL J
R
5
6
Description
Current federal law allows states to operate on standard
time year-round or to operate for part of the year on
standard time and part of the year (the first Sunday in
April through the last Sunday in October) on Daylight
Saving Time (DST).
Current state law doesn't require California to operate on
standard time on a year-round basis, so the state therefore
operates on DST for seven months of the year.
This resolution outlines the history of DST and
memorializes the President and Congress to allow states to
operate on DST on a year-round basis.
BACKGROUND
DST was first suggested by Benjamin Franklin in 1784 as a
way of saving on candles. It was first seriously advocated
by William Willit, a British builder, in his pamphlet
"Waste of Daylight" in 1907, but it didn't "officially"
begin in the U.S. until World War I, when it was enacted
primarily to extend the length of the production day and
save fuel by reducing the need to use artificial lighting.
Although some states and communities observed daylight
saving time after the war's end, DST wasn't officially
observed nationally again until 1942, when it was
re-enacted for World War II, then repealed after the war.
The Uniform Time Act of 1966 established a standardized
system of operating DST throughout the U.S. and its
territories, exempting only those states and territories
that enacted laws to keep their entire state or territory
on standard time. One of the driving forces behind the
creation of the Act was Fred Ackerman, the Chairman of the
Greyhound Bus Lines Board. In the early 1960's, Greyhound
couldn't print bus schedules fast enough to keep up with
the time changes throughout the country. Bus schedules
were obsolete in two weeks and so complicated that the
average passenger couldn't decode them - then when the
passenger missed the bus, he or she would generally blame
the bus company.
The entire country went on year-round DST during the 1974
energy crisis in an effort to save energy. While some
savings were realized, a number of people - in particular
those in the farming community - complained being on
year-round DST made them work an extra hour in the dark in
the early morning winter months and getting an extra hour
of light at the end of the day wasn't worth the trade-off.
The plug was pulled on the year-round DST experiment in
April 1975 and the current system of beginning DST at 2:00
a.m. on first Sunday in April and ending it at 2:00 a.m. on
the last Sunday in October was standardized in 1986.
Today, DST begins at 2:00 a.m. on the first Sunday in
April, when clocks "spring" forward one hour, and ends at
2:00 a.m. on the last Sunday of October when clocks "fall
back" one hour to standard time.
Hawaii, the eastern time zone portion of Indiana, Arizona
(except for the area of the Navajo Indian Reservation),
American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands
don't observe DST.
QUESTIONS
1.Should California encourage the federal government to
enact legislation to give states the option of going to
DST on a full-time basis?
2.If California is asking for federal authority to move to
year-round DST, presumably that means California has an
interest in making such a move. As such, what are the
pros and cons of moving to DST on a full-time basis,
assuming Congress and the President opt to give states
that authority?
COMMENTS
1)Got A Light? Whether the country operates full-time on
standard time, on split time, or on DST year-round as it
did in 1974, no "new" light is created. Rather, it's
question of when light is provided - in the early morning
or the late afternoon/early evening.
The following is a look at when the sun would rise and
set in Sacramento under the various time zone options
that would be available if the federal government acted
on AJR 56 and gave California the ability to move to DST
on a year-round basis:
-------------------------------------------------------------
| |Current ST/DST | Full-Time ST | Full-Time DST |
-------------------------------------------------------------
|----------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+--------|
| |Sunrise|Sunset |Sunrise| Sunset |Sunrise | Sunset |
| | | | | | | |
|----------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+--------|
|March 21 | 6:08 | 6:19 | 6:08 | 6:19 | 7:08 | 7:19 |
| | a.m.| p.m.| a.m.| p.m.| a.m.|p.m. |
|----------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+--------|
|June 21 | 5:42 | 8:33 | 4:40 | 7:21 | 5:42 | 8:33 |
| | a.m.| p.m.| a.m.| p.m.| a.m.| p.m.|
|----------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+--------|
|December | 7:20 | 4:48 | 7:20 | 4:48 | 8:20 | 5:48 |
|21 | a.m.| p.m.| a.m.| p.m.| a.m.| p.m.|
-------------------------------------------------------------
(Data obtained from the U.S. Naval Observatory Website on
Sun and Moon Data )
1)Light Evenings Mean Dark Mornings . In the summer time,
when the period between sunrise and sunset is about 15
hours long, the effect of moving one hour of light
between morning and evening isn't very pronounced. As
noted in the above example, sunrise shifts from 4:40 a.m.
to 5:42 a.m. in Sacramento as a result of going to DST.
However, moving an hour of light from the morning to the
evening in the winter months when the period between
sunrise and sunset is just over 9 hours will arguably
have a much greater impact on people's lives when, for
example, the sun wouldn't rise in Sacramento until 8:20
a.m.
2)Safety Issues . Some believe that going to DST on a
year-round basis will reduce the number of traffic
accidents because there will more light at the end of the
day. Others believe that there won't be any net safety
benefit because a move to year-round DST doesn't "create"
more daylight, it just moves it from the morning to the
evening, which may only have the effect of moving the
frequency of accidents from the evening to the morning.
Some have noted that when year-round DST was adopted
during the 1974 energy crisis, one of the reasons it was
repealed was an increased number of bus accidents in the
morning.
A University of British Columbia study of traffic
accidents throughout Canada in 1991 and 1992 found an 8%
increase in traffic accidents on the Monday after the
April "spring forward" to DST. Whether the accidents
stem primarily from people being forced to drive in
darker conditions or from people driving with an hour
less of sleep isn't clear from the study.
4)Another Step Away From Uniformity . The purpose of the
Uniform Time Act of 1966 was to put states on a
relatively uniform time schedule within their specific
times zones. Granted, the fact that Hawaii, most of
Arizona, and the eastern portion of Indiana have
exercised the option under the Uniform Time Act not to
move to DST during the summer means that states already
aren't operating on a uniform time system. However, this
proposal, if enacted by the federal government, gives
states the option to move even further away from the
notion of a uniform time system by going to DST on a
year-round basis.
5)More Than A Resolution? While this measure urges the
federal government to give California and other states
the option of going to DST on a year-round basis, it
doesn't have the force and effect of law, nor does it
obligate the state to make such a move should Congress
and the President carry out the request of this AJR. On
the other hand, if the committee doesn't feel moving to
DST on a year-round basis is a good idea, it may wish to
consider whether or not the California Legislature should
ask the federal government for permission to make such a
move.
ASSEMBLY VOTES
Assembly Utilities & Commerce Committee(8-3)
Assembly Floor (67-6)
POSITIONS
Sponsor:
Author
Support:
None on file.
Oppose:
None on file.
Anna Ferrera
AJR 56 Analysis
Hearing Date: June 13, 2000