Mr. FRIEDEL. I want to thank you, Mr. Bush, for a very, very fine statement. It is a good report. Mr. BUSH. Thank you. Mr. FRIEDEL. Mr. Moss, do you have any questions? Mr. Moss. Not at the moment, Mr. Friedel. Mr. FRIEDEL. Mr. Younger? Mr. YOUNGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Bush, do you think you will have any difficult enforcing such a measure with the railroads? Mr. BUSH. No, sir; I don't believe we would. I think the railroads, Mr. Younger, like everybody else, realize what a problem this is and that progress would be made by whatever the Congress does this year. I do not see where we would have any trouble enforcing it. I do not anticipate any. Do you have any specific area of thought? Mr. YOUNGER. By and large, the railroads have not used daylight saving. Mr. BUSH. Yes. Mr. YOUNGER. Well, we have the Transportation Act. That is what causes me to ask the question. Mr. BUSH. Actually, I have not consulted with Mr. Loomis or the railroad men to any degree on this, but I believe that they would see the wisdom of going along with it. If it becomes law, I do not anticipate any difficulty in the Commission enforcing it. Mr. YOUNGER. Of course, if you limit it to any organization doing business with the public, they would have to. Mr. BUSH. Yes; that is what I meant. I do not see any reason why they would or could ask to be excluded if it becomes law. Mr. FRIEDEL. Mr. Van Deerlin, any questions? Mr. VAN DEERLIN. No, thank you. Mr. FRIEDEL. Mr. Rooney? Mr. ROONEY. No questions. Mr. MURPHY. No. Mr. FRIEDEL. Thank you. Our next witness will be the Honorable Mr. Ramspeck, a former colleague of ours. Accompanying him will be Mr. Robert E. Redding, executive director of the Committee for Time Uniformity. STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT RAMSPECK, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE FOR TIME UNIFORMITY, WASHINGTON, D.C., AS PRESENTED BY ROBERT E. REDDING, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, COMMITTEE FOR TIME UNIFORMITY AND VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL COUNSEL, TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA Mr. REDDING. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, my name is Robert E. Redding. I am vice president and general counsel of the Transportation Association of America and executive director of the committee for time uniformity. I regret to say that so far, Mr. Ramspeck has not arrived, although we expected him to be here. He is in the city and he was to have left home at an early hour in order to have been present at this hearing. I am sorry that he is not here at this moment, and I hope he will arrive momentarily. If he does, I know he would appreciate the opportunity to present his statement. Under the circumstances, however, I believe you have before you a statement by Mr. Ramspeck which I would like to refer to just on the chance that he is unable to be here. If you happen to see him arrive while I am speaking, I would appreciate it if you would interrupt me. I do not intend to read this statement, Mr. Chairman. I shall submit it for the record. But I would like to call to your attention the contents of this statement for purposes of future reference by the committee or by your staff. Mr. FRIEDEL. Without any objection, Mr. Ramspeck's statement will be included in the record at this point. Mr. REDDING. Thank you very much. We have attached to this statement materials in the interest of conserving time, including, perhaps most importantly, a summary including maps of the 1965 time observances throughout the United States, and for purposes of convenience, that summary is the very last attachment. The very last page is three maps which will show you the nature and extent of daylight time observance in 1963. We have also enclosed with this statement a historical summary of the problems of time confusion and a background statement which includes a number of interesting examples of the problems we have in time observance throughout the country. There is also a succinct summary of press comments throughout the Nation which urged Congress to enact time uniformity legislation. I would not propose to discuss the 1965 pattern of observance other than to say that daylight saving time last year was observed in 36 of the 50 States. We found that in some areas, it was on a statewide basis and in other areas, merely local. We found that it was being observed in different periods of the year. We found that even in jurisdictions not observing daylight saving time, such as the example indicates at the bottom of page 3 of Mr. Ramspeck's testimony, in one of the cities in the far Southwest, Tucson, when daylight saving time became effective elsewhere in the country, there were almost 40 schedule changes of the common carriers serving that city, even though it was in a State not observing any daylight time. We have also summarized for you instances of legislative activities. in various States now proposing to expand daylight saving time, in some instances to a 4-year period. It is for this reason that we have encouraged the Congress to act now in order to bring about as much uniformity of the daylight saving time period as possible. In recent months, we have had occasion to survey the extent of the financial burden of time observance throughout the country and the confusion which prevails, and you will find in the so-called Ramspeck statement a summary to the effect that, considering the burden as reported by the bus industry, the railroads, the radio-TV industry, and the local service airlines, it approaches something in the nature of $5 million a year. But of interest to me, and I would think to you, is the fact that Federal subsidy is involved in time observance, in the sense that the local service carriers are subsidized by the Civil Aeronautics Board. To 58-797-66--5 the extent that they incur additional expense in multiple revision of timetables brought about by the differing time observances throughout the country, this has the effect of involving taxpayer money to pay a portion of that cost. We have also summarized the contents of the 17 bills pending before the committee. We have included a clarification of the proposed standard time changes which are included in a number of these bills, and we merely conclude by recommending that the committee approve the language of the three bills-H.R. 6785, introduced by Chairman Staggers, H.R. 6481, introduced by former Chairman Harris, and the bill also introduced by Congressman Macdonald, H.R. 7867. Congressman Fraser's bill, H.R. 11743, is essentially similar. These bills were put together by the combined efforts of your professional staff as well as that on the Senate side, working with the cooperation of the industry and with the professional staff of the Interstate Commerce Commission. We feel that the language in these bills is the most reasonable and practical thing which we can achieve at this time because it will at least establish uniform switchover dates in those States or political subdivisions choosing to observe daylight time-that is the first thing it will do. The second thing it will do is modernize the 1918 law by adding new time zones to conform with present observances. Third, it will direct the Interstate Commerce Commission to foster and promote nationwide time uniformity, and finally, would protect those parties seeking time-zone boundary changes by applying the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act to the ICC proceed ings. We would say, however, that in view of the Senate action in June 1965 wherein the Senate Commerce Committee reported out favorably S. 1404 with two amendments, and 2 days later, the bill was passed on the Senate floor, we would have no objection, certainly, to the approval by this committee of that bill, in the interest of eliminating the need to return to the Senate in any type of conference proceeding. Mr. FRIEDEL. Is that the bill that has no penalty clause? Mr. REDDING. The bill to which I refer, S. 1404, had the penalty clause removed from it, by Senate amendment on the recommendation of the Senate Commerce Committee. Mr. FRIEDEL. You would be in favor of that just for expediency? Mr. REDDING. I would say those of us who have worked with this problem share the feeling of the Interstate Commerce Commission that it would be preferable to have enforcement language, generally, in order to encourage observance of daylight saving time on a uniform basis. However, we have worked on this problem long enough to realize and appreciate that perhaps even if it is deleted, we'll find the general public, certainly, and Federal and State officials, anxious to achieve greater uniformity. And as indicated in the Senate report on the matter, it would be very unlikely that we could envisage the Interstate Commerce Commission gong to court and suing a State or local political subdivision on the matter. It is our hope and our firm expectation that this would not be necessary and that by voluntary compliance and observance, we could achieve the ends we seek. Therefore, while having helped to draft the bills I refer to containing enforcement language, we note that the Senate Commerce Commitee, both in 1963 and 1965, and the Senate itself in 1965 concluded that such enforcement language should be deleted. We do hope to achieve Presidential approval of time legislation by no later than March 1 of this year, in order that the use of uniform adoption of daylight-saving time can be made effective during this same period. Mr. Chairman, that is a summary of the highlights in Mr. Ramspeck's statement. (The complete statement of Mr. Ramspeck follows:) STATEMENT OF ROBERT RAM SPECK, NATIONAL CHAIRMAN, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, my name is Robert Ramspeck. I reside at 9516 West Stanhope Road, Kensington, Md. Over the years I have enjoyed the privilege of serving as a Congressman from Georgia, as well as Chairman of the Civil Service Commission. My experience with the transportation industry has included 5 years as executive vice president of the Air Transport Association, comprised of all the scheduled airlines. More recently, I served as vice president of Eastern Air Lines, Inc., from which position I have recently retired. I appear here again today in my capacity as national chairman of the Committee for Time Uniformity, with principal offices at 1101 17th Street NW., Washington, D.C. I know you are familiar with the efforts of this committee, organized and coordinated by the Transportation Association of America, and have attached a description of its activities and membership to my statement. Suffice it to say that it includes 43 nationally known and privately operated institutions and organizations in the transportation, communications, shipping, finance, travel, farming, labor, and general business fields. We have also enjoyed the friendly cooperation of 23 governmental units-Federal, State, and local-including five Cabinet-level Departments. We have worked together to achieve greater nationwide time uniformity at Federal, State, and local levels. It was some 20 months ago, on June 18, 1964, that I appeared before the Subcommittee on Commerce and Finance of the House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, of which you, Mr. Chairman, were then chairman. My appearance was on behalf of the Committee for Time Uniformity in support of corrective legislation. We appreciate the attention you then gave the subject, and regret that the 88th Congress adjourned before it was possible to enact appropriate legislation. We are optimistic now that the job can be completed within the next several weeks in order that all Americans may be freed this year from time smorgasbord. I will not take the committee's time today to elaborate on the general factual background of the problem. I would rather propose to submit for the record various relevant materials as to which we would be pleased to answer questions. These attachments include (1) a summary, including maps, of the 1965 time observances throughout the United States; (2) a historical summary of national time schizophrenia; and (3) a few succinct comments observed in the nationwide press which urge the Congress to enact time uniformity legislation. At the conclusion of my testimony, Mr. Robert E. Redding, vice president and general counsel of the Transportation Association of America and executive director of the Committee for Time Uniformity, would like to present a statement on behalf of these parties in support of greater time uniformity. He will then be followed by key witnesses from the vitally affected national interests cooperating with the Committee for Time Uniformity. It is my further understanding that many other interested organizations will be submitting written statements in support of affirmative action to end clock confusion, and I hope that the record of this hearing will be kept open for a few days for the receipt of such communications. I The gravity of the national pattern of time is readily apparent by referring to the attachment showing the 1965 practices throughout the United States. The three maps will graphically tell the story and I will comment only briefly about this. The first map shows the States which observed daylight saving time, whether on a statewide or nonstatewide basis, while the other two maps reflect the wide disparity of switchover dates. Map 2 reflects the 1965 dates on which DST States shifted to daylight-saving time. Map 3 shows the dates on which such States returned from daylight-saving to standard time in the fall. These materials reflect the fact that daylight saving time was observed last year in 36 of the 50 States in the Union. Those States not observing DST are located in the south-central and southeastern sectors of the United States. One of the most perplexing causes of clock confusion is the widespread variation among States and communities as to the dates on which they begin and end daylight saving time. The problem of beginning DST on different dates has been considerably reduced by CTU and other efforts, with 19 of the 36 States switching from standard to daylight time on the last Sunday in April. Conversely, 16 of the 36 States returned to standard time on the last Sunday in October. The remaining States used a wide variety of switchover dates to and from daylight-saving time. It is also significant to point out that clock confusion also exists even in areas not observing any daylight-saving time. For example, when 20 States shifted to DST in 1964 there were 38 schedule changes of the common carriers serving Tucson, Ariz. II I would also emphasize that your committee's review and solution of the time problem is coming not a moment too soon. Many States have considered or are now considering the establishment of new daylight-saving time periods at variance from the prevailing 6-months period, including possible authorization on a year-round basis. For example: (1) In 1963, the Maine Legislature considered a bill to begin DST on the last Sunday in February; in 1965, a bill went through the second reading for year-round DST subject to referendum. (2) In 1965 a 15-man commission to study DST for all of New England was proposed in the Massachusetts State legislature. (3) In 1965, there was an Illinois bill for statewide DST between the last Sunday in March to the last Sunday of September. (4) In New Hampshire and Connecticut, year-round DST proposals were debated in 1965. (5) Last year a New York bill urged 9 months of DST between Washington's Birthday and Thanksgiving. III The lack of time uniformity not only creates untold confusion and inconvenience for John Q. Public but also is a costly burden. We have requested some of the key interests to estimate such annual expense. In general, they add up to approximately $1 million a year for the bus industry, $2 million for the railroads, $2 million for the radio-TV industry, and approaching a quarter million dollars annually for the local service airlines. This puts the total bill of these interests alone at well over $5 million a year. We also point out to you that the time crazy quilt is being subsidized every year with taxpayer funds. The local service carrier cost burden reflects extra printings of timetables for public use, and expense subsidized by the Civil Aeronautics Board. IV I would now like to comment briefly on the time bills pending before the committee. There are 17 such bills, of which 3 are identical bills, including H.R. 6785 introduced by you, Mr. Chairman, H.R. 7867 introduced by you, Mr. Macdonald, and H.R. 6481 introduced by past Chairman Oren Harris. The Committee for Time Uniformity was active in the drafting of these measures, working in cooperation with key staff members of the Interstate Commerce Commission, your committee, and the Senate Commerce Committee. The language of these bills was also reviewed and cleared by the respective legislative counsel of both Houses. H.R. 11743, introduced by Congressman Fraser, of Minnesota, is almost the same, with minor differences only. May I first summarize briefly the contents of the three identical bills, mentioning for the sake of convenience and clarity only H.R. 6785. The other bills are summarized in the final attachment to this statement. |