Just a guess, but they seem to justify all their actions under the Commerce clause. I'd welcome a court challenge, but no one seems able to conjure up one.
Perhaps the greatest problem in American constitutional law is that members of Congress have almost uniformly decided to leave constitutional issues to the courts (and DOJ), instead of actively and faithfully complying with their oaths to conform their conduct to the Constitution. If Rubio thinks the Commerce Clause doesn’t authorize Congress to rigidly control the clocks in every state, then that would be the end of it, no court would require Rubio to introduce and vote for this legislation. But Rubio’s attitude is: let’s pass this bill and then it’s up to the courts to decide if it’s valid. Thus is an abdication of sworn duty on Rubio’s part, IMHO. And of course this is just a small example of the same phenomenon. Our constitutional system was not built to withstand such behavior. And I admire Rubio a lot on most issues!
Agree, it is tough. Dairy cows, sunrises, sunsets, and so much more don't change their clocks. But There's a strong body of evidence that changing clocks, especially when we "Spring forward," has health and safety consequences. So yes, changing clocks is a net negative. One friend emailed me that China has only two time zones. I wonder why we have four (Alaska, Hawaii, and Pacific Island territories excepted).
Yearlong standard time would be great. But where in the Constitution does Congress get power to do this?
https://originalismblog.typepad.com/the-originalism-blog/2022/03/us-senate-stretches-its-limited-and-enumerated-powers-by-locking-states-into-permanent-yearlong-dayl.html
Just a guess, but they seem to justify all their actions under the Commerce clause. I'd welcome a court challenge, but no one seems able to conjure up one.
Perhaps the greatest problem in American constitutional law is that members of Congress have almost uniformly decided to leave constitutional issues to the courts (and DOJ), instead of actively and faithfully complying with their oaths to conform their conduct to the Constitution. If Rubio thinks the Commerce Clause doesn’t authorize Congress to rigidly control the clocks in every state, then that would be the end of it, no court would require Rubio to introduce and vote for this legislation. But Rubio’s attitude is: let’s pass this bill and then it’s up to the courts to decide if it’s valid. Thus is an abdication of sworn duty on Rubio’s part, IMHO. And of course this is just a small example of the same phenomenon. Our constitutional system was not built to withstand such behavior. And I admire Rubio a lot on most issues!
It’s a tough one. Farmers and many parents of young kids would hate DST on January mornings.
The whole country would be mad with year-round Standard Time on summer evenings.
We live in a country of complaint.
Is spring forward fall back really so bad?
Agree, it is tough. Dairy cows, sunrises, sunsets, and so much more don't change their clocks. But There's a strong body of evidence that changing clocks, especially when we "Spring forward," has health and safety consequences. So yes, changing clocks is a net negative. One friend emailed me that China has only two time zones. I wonder why we have four (Alaska, Hawaii, and Pacific Island territories excepted).