Twice-yearly clock change a waste of time

Over the weekend we engaged in the tiresome twice-yearly ritual of changing the time on our clocks, a practice from which it often takes a few days to recover.

Our tiresome ritual of changing the time settings is a practice that often takes days from which to recover.

Gaining an hour of sleep in the fall and then losing it as spring approaches doesn’t seem to make a whole lot of sense, yet we do it year after year.

So we were pleased to hear that a bipartisan group of U.S. senators last week reintroduced a bill that would put an end to time changes.

The Sunshine Protection Act, proposed by Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., along with four Republican and three Democratic senators, says we should stop using standard time, which already is only in effect four months of the year.

“The call to end the antiquated practice of clock changing is gaining momentum throughout the nation,” Rubio said in a statement announcing the bill.

Florida’s Legislature passed its own version of the proposal in 2018, as have 15 other states. Individual states, however, can’t make the change without an act of Congress allowing it.

Rubio and others rightfully argue that ending the time change would improve public health by eliminating the need to adjust our sleep schedules and encouraging more exercise and other activity.

Time changes are particularly difficult for parents with small children. And studies show that the March time change consistently leads to an increase in heart attacks, strokes and workplace injuries.

There are advantages to more daylight later in the day. A 2008 U.S. Department of Energy report showed that daylight saving time reduces electricity usage by about 0.5% daily. And robbery rates drop significantly every spring. Apparently criminals prefer working evenings to mornings. People do feel safer in daylight.

“Springing forward and falling back year after year only creates unnecessary confusion while harming Americans’ health and our economy,” said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore. “Making daylight saving permanent would give folks an hour back of sunshine during the winter months when we need it most.”

These arguments make plenty of sense.

It’s been a long and twisting path that brought the United States to this point.

Instituted by Congress in 1918 to save energy during World War I, the United States’ first experience with adjusting time lasted only seven months.

Then during World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the clocks ahead an hour year-round from 1942 into 1945.

For the next two decades or so, states and other jurisdictions were left to decide when and if they would change clocks. Then Congress passed the Uniform Time Act of 1966, mandating a time frame for daylight saving (from late April to late October), though some states and territories opted out, allowing for confusion that continues to this day in certain parts of the country.

The schedule has shifted periodically over the decades. The current March and November regime has been in effect since 2007.

To be fair, the inconvenience isn’t quite as bad as it used to be, as many electronic devices change the time on their own (though adjusting the clock on a newer car can be an adventure). And there’s an element of personal preference here. No doubt there are “morning people” who object to the idea of having to wake up in darkness any longer than necessary.

But we suspect most Americans would welcome consistency with their clocks and their sleep schedules. And with so many people now working from home rather than commuting, the issue of morning daylight in winter isn’t quite as important as it once was.

Let’s put an end to the tiring and tiresome practice of adjusting the time back and forth. Congress should seriously consider the proposal by Rubio and his Republican and Democratic colleagues and stop wasting Americans’ time with the twice-annual chore of changing our clocks.