The second concerns the geographic limitation of advanced time subzones which results from the provision that areas may not be included if the mean solar time differential exceeds 1 hour and 30 minutes. We understand this to mean that, generally speaking, in most zones and areas the westernmost parts of the zones would be ineligible for advanced or daylight saving time no matter how great the local desire for it might be.

We believe that further consideration should be given to whether these restrictions upon the power of the Interstate Commerce Commission to establish daylight saving time are necessary and in the public interest.

It is our belief that H.R. 11483 would have the effect of achieving a desirable degree of uniformity in our timekeeping practices-far more than we have at present. Subject to the reservations expressed in this statement we consider it to be a good bill and recommend its enactment.

Mr. LONG. First, we have several bills which would make standard time mandatory all year round. In this category we have bills by Representative Gray of Illinois (H.R. 2335) and Representative Price of Illinois (H.R. 2532) as well as a bill introduced by Congressman Staggers, the chairman of this subcommittee (H.R. 3114).

Next, we have several bills which would make daylight saving time mandatory during certain calendar periods-H.R. 6284 by Representative Fulton of Tennessee and H.R. 11407 introduced by the chairman of our full committee, Representative Oren Harris of Arkansas.

A third category consists of bills which would fix specific dates on which daylight time would begin and end in those jurisdictions which observe daylight time. Here we have H.R. 11206 by Representative Fraser of Minnesota, H.R. 11310 by Representative Karth of Minnesota, and H.R. 11672 by Representative Corman of California.

Fourth, we have bills introduced by the chairman of our full committee, H.R. 4702 and H.R. 7891, introduced by Mr. Staggers. These bills incorporate the recommendations of the ICC on the subject of time uniformity and provide for mandatory observance of standard and daylight time zones for Federal, State, and local purposes.

Finally, we have H.R. 11483 which Congressman Staggers introduced in order to bring before the subcommittee a bill identical with a bill (S. 1033) reported in the other body by the Senate Commerce Committee. This bill is based on the ICC bill which I just mentioned but it would make time uniformity mandatory only for Federal activities and interstate transportation and communications.

This represents a short rundown of the bills on which we are holding hearings this morning, and without anything further we shall hear from our first witness this morning, who is Congressman Donald Fraser of the State of Minnesota.

Congressman Fraser, would you come forth and proceed in your own. order please. We are of course happy to have you and happy to have your views on this matter.

STATEMENT OF HON. DONALD M. FRASER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA

Mr. FRASER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.

First, may I express my appreciation for the opportunity to testify and for the fact that the committee is holding hearings on this subject. It is one that plagued me for many years as a member our of State legislature and now appears to be an issue that plagues Congress, but it is one I think that does have to be resolved.

36-471-64--3

I am happy to appear today in support of H.R. 11206, a bill which I introduced in order to provide a uniform period of daylight saving time.

This bill would simply have all daylight saving time begin at 2 a.m. on the last Sunday of April and continue until 2 a.m. on the last Sunday of October each year. The cities and States which have elected to go on daylight saving time would all shift on and off daylight saving time on the same day.

This bill is a straightforward measure designed to eliminate needless confusion. The need for standardization is apparent in this era of interlocking State and regional economies. It is apparent in this era of jet travel and continental superhighways. It is apparent when many people work and live in different localities and even different States.

Some local authorities have found themselves faced with a dilemma in deciding on the effective dates of daylight saving. In my own State of Minnesota, Duluth was torn between starting daylight saving with other Minnesota cities at the end of May or earlier when its twin port of Superior, Wis., changed.

Other cities bordering neighboring States and Canada altered their daylight savings period to conform with their neighbors across the border. While confusion within these communities was thus minimized, the fact is that these cities clearly acted in violation of State law. Because of the lack of time uniformity local communities have undertaken the dangerous precedent of violating State law.

The virtues of local autonomy are many, but to the businessman or tourist, the varying dates of changeover must seem idle caprice. For example, in the Midwest the traveler is faced with the following situation: Chicago observes central daylight time from the last Sunday in April to the last Sunday in October. Minneapolis is on daylight saving time from the first Sunday in May to after Labor Day. Milwaukee, which is situated between Chicago and Minneapolis, changes over to daylight time the same time as Chicago but returns to standard time on a different date from both Minneapolis and Chicago.

The common carrier serving these cities must take account of five different shifts in time. The traveler who wants to make a train or an appointment during the spring or autumn months must master both the latest time schedule and his temper. Similar situations exist throughout the country.

Many States, including my own, are interested in promoting travel and tourism. I suggest that eliminating annoying time differences both within and between States would help this objective. Certainly foreign visitors must be dismayed by the frequent differences of time in what is supposed to be one great Nation.

As it is now, no one governmental agency is ever sure what the latest daylight saving changeover date is on a community by community basis. Local and State legislation frequently revises dates.

The transportation industry's committee for time uniformity has therefore tried to provide data on current practice. According to their recent survey, of the 29 States observing daylight saving time on both a statewide and local option basis, all but 5 States switch to daylight saving time the last Sunday in April. For this reason, I have used this most common starting date in my bill even though most of my own State of Minnesota currently observes a later date.

The most frequently used date to return to standard time is also the date contained in this bill, the fourth Sunday in October-though a wide variety of dates exist. Communities in Iowa, for instance, returned to standard time last year on six different dates ranging from August 25 to October 27.

There seems to be no good reason for all of this variance. Undoubtedly many States and communities chose their changeover dates without any real awareness of the need for uniformity. Nevertheless, the need does exist. We need to correct current practices and prevent further confusion in the future.

Standardization of daylight saving time would result in cost savings to airlines, buslines, and railroads as the need to change schedules would become less frequent. It would eliminate some annoying time confusion for the traveler, whether he is going by automobile or public transportation. Broadcasting and communications in general would benefit.

My bill would provide for a standard 6 months of daylight saving time for those States and communities which utilize daylight saving. It would not impose any unwanted change to daylight saving on those sections of our country which prefer standard time. It would only amend the existing Standard Time Act, enacted in 1918, to provide for a uniform period of daylight saving time.

May I emphasize that my interest is in uniformity. The beginning and ending dates proposed in my bill reflect the practices of the majority of the States. I might suggest a possible variation the committee could explore: Require uniformity in the dates but provide that the dates for beginning and the dates for ending would be those which a majority of the States observing daylight saving time favored at any given time as indicated by resolutions adopted by the respective legislatures and maintained on file with Congress or the executive branch.

Thus, for example, the bill could provide for the beginning and ending dates now observed by the majority of States having some daylight saving time, but provide that if a majority of such States should favor by resolution a different beginning or ending date, then upon appropriate certification the next period of daylight saving would begin or end on such revised date. I do not urge such a provision, but merely suggest its possible use if there are many who wish to preserve a maximum of State determination while retaining uniformity.

In my own State of Minnesota, a recent statewide poll showed that a majority of State residents favor congressional action to set uniform time limits for all States choosing to go on daylight saving time.

Minnesotans 20 years ago favored the retention of standard time throughout the year. Only in 1957 did majority support for daylight saving time emerge. The subsequent confusion within Minnesota over starting and terminating dates resulted in a special session of the legislature to set the dates in 1959. To this internal confusion has now been added the inconvenience and illegal practices of local communities in choosing their own starting times.

As a result, Minnesota residents are asking the Federal Government to set a uniform time period for daylight saving. This is true for both those who support and those who oppose having daylight saving

in Minnesota at all. I ask Mr. Chairman, that the results of this poll as published in the Minneapolis Tribune on June 14, 1964, be made a part of this record.

Mr. LONG. Without objection it is so ordered.

(The statement referred to follows:)

MINNESOTA POLL: 58 PERCENT SAY CONGRESS SHOULD DECIDE DATES FOR DAYLIGHT

SAVING

(Copyright 1964, Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co.)

Minnesotans are divided on whether to start daylight saving time (DST) in late April or in late May, but a majority of State residents think it would be better if Congress set uniform limits for all States who use it.

In a statewide survey by the Minneapolis Tribune's Minnesota poll, 58 percent of the people interviewed favor having Congress establish uniform dates for daylight time.

More than a third of the men and women (35 percent) think each State should make that decision rather than Congress. Seven percent either offer other suggestions, such as dropping daylight time altogether, or have no opinion.

On the question of when to start advanced time, 43 percent of the people prefer late April and 45 percent favor late May.

The switchover to DST in Minnesota was complicated this year because some communities like Duluth and Winona started 4 weeks ahead of the official date. That development led Representative Donald Fraser of Minneapolis to introduce a bill in the U.S. House of Representatives calling for daylight time to begin each year on the last Sunday in April and continue until the last Sunday in October. His bill would apply just to DST States.

Interviewing in the survey was done in late May, right at the time most Minnesotans were advancing their clocks ahead 1 hour. A representative sampling of 600 men and women was asked:

"On the whole, do you like or dislike having daylight saving time during the summer months?"

The replies:

As has been indicated in several past Minnesota poll surveys, strongest support for DST is voiced by people in the 21 to 39 age range (73 percent like it), and by residents of Minneapolis, St. Paul and Duluth (also 73 percent).

Twice as many farm residents dislike fast time (67 percent do) as like it (30 percent).

People also were asked:

"Minnesota officially begins daylight saving time each year on the fourth Sunday in May. In many parts of the United States, it begins in late April. If you had to choose, would you prefer to have Minnesota go on daylight time in late April, or wait until late May?"

Men and women fail to see eye-to-eye on this question:

Six out of ten adults who like daylight time (61 percent) favor starting it in late April; a higher proportion who dislike it (64 percent) prefer keeping the late May starting date.

The final question in the series was:

"Which do you think is better-that Congress decide when daylight time should start and end for all States that use it, or that each State decide that for itself?"

The responses of different types of State residents:

Mr. FRASER. The Federal Government is responsible for the wellbeing of all its citizens. It is concerned with economic waste wherever it appears. We cannot afford to waste the resources of our country, particularly when the cause of this waste can easily be corrected. For this reason, I have sponsored this legislation. I urge its immediate adoption to correct current anomalies and to provide one future uniform daylight saving period.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. LONG. Thank you, Mr. Fraser. You don't have any doubt in your mind but what if a uniform system were adopted it would remove the practices in some of these communities of choosing their own starting times, do you?

Mr. FRASER. I don't believe that it would necessarily end the desire to do this, but I think as a practical matter it would eliminate it because of the fact that there was one national uniform standard for daylight saving.

For example, part of the problem in our own community is reflected in the fact that Minneapolis and St. Paul, the metropolitan center of our State, is located only 30 miles from Wisconsin, and Wisconsin has different beginning and ending dates. Duluth and Superior are twin ports, one in Wisconsin and one in Minnesota, and both States observe daylight saving.

If there were uniform dates then there would be no problem of this kind. On the western border of Minnesota where we border South and North Dakota, if those States elected not to go on daylight saving time there might still be that urge for a community right across the border to want to conform to their neighboring areas, but I think that once it was settled that there was going to be a national pattern you should observe it. You should either go on it or not go on it. Then there would be no problem.

As a matter of fact, I might just add the problem even then would be limited to the choice of not going on at all or going on, and we preserve this autonomy in our bill. We don't require that a whole State go on. We only say if you go on, then you should go on at

that certain date.