On 7/30/2026 5:35 PM, Tim Parenti via tz wrote:
H.R. 139, as presently drafted, would remove choice from states — and
in fact, would repeal the DST opt-out mechanism entirely, relying on
legacy language to avoid forcing Arizona, Hawaii, and the territories
forward. H.R. 9638, by contrast, would increase state choice
significantly at the potential cost of a chaotic mess of local
observances — it would allow year-round standard time, year-round
daylight time, and optional seasonal time changes to coexist, while
also repealing mandated transition dates for areas choosing to observe
seasonal time changes.
Neither approach is inherently right or wrong, but each swings the
pendulum in a different way and therefore raises different concerns.
Arguably these two bills are pretty close to the two possible
extremes; still others have aimed for somewhat more nuanced approaches.
During the Senate Committee Hearing and vote on S.29 held last year
Senator Cruz noted that his amendment ("/The amendments made by
subsections (a) and (b) shall take effect on the date that is 2 years
after the date of the enactment of this Act./") will allow states two
years to choose whether they want standard time or daylight time. Not a
bad idea but I would key it off of first Sunday of November / second
Sunday of March so passing the law late this year would not lead to a
"fall back" weeks before a "spring forward" to permanent DST.
I do not like relying on references to the law as it existed before
enactment of a new law that repealed the choice. I fully expect every
state/territory that has opted out to remain opted out of DST - the law
should handle that without footnotes.
The "opt out" law does not serve Indiana as well as it could.
Technically all Indiana has to do is pass a law restoring their opt out
of DST and they would stay on EST -05 (the same time as Chicago's new
CST -05). But there are at least seven counties in Indiana that would
want to stay with whatever Louisville and Cincinnati do. Having DOT
redraw the boundary between Eastern and Central time would be a better
option if the Indianapolis area wants to move to Chicago time. That is
the direction I would move for Arizona or any state that wants to move
into a time zone to the west. Redraw the lines. Don't have two "MST"
definitions (one current, one in a footnote).
Even when passing the bill out of the senate committee the senators
stated that the bill still needed further work. Some stating that they
would support sending the bill to the full senate with a promise to vote
against it on the floor. And while the vote taken April 30th 2025 was to
advance the bill the committee needs to revote before the bill is
actually sent. Every meeting that passes without action makes it less
likely that it will be approved by the end of the year. And then they
start again in the next congress.
