Mr. FRIEDEL. Without objection, your full statement will be included in the record.

Mr. BRANDT. Thank you.

My board of directors, by resolution, supports the principle of a national uniform daylight saving time law.

Some of our members find it necessary to change their operating hours to facilitate better connections with suppliers and customers. Attached to my remarks is a copy of a sheet which came to my desk in 1965 announcing the change of trading hours for the Minneapolis Grain Exchange. A change of hours when Chicago went on daylight saving time in April, another change when Minnesota went on in May, another change on September 6 when Minnesota went off and a final change when Chicago went off daylight saving time on November 1.

So there are four changes in operating hours during a period of 6 months.

The State of Minnesota will likely resolve its problem in the next session of the legislature after reapportionment. However, many other State legislatures getting additional urban representation will be facing the same struggle that Minnesota has gone through during the past 8 years, arguing the matter in legislative halls, and finally comprising on daylight saving time dates generally unsatisfactory to

everyone.

The proposal you are considering, although it may be somewhat of a compromise, is a reasonable solution. In Minnesota, and I suspect in most other States, the issue of daylight-savings time divides on rural-urban lines. The legislator who has both rural and urban constituents is the man to be pitied.

As a State experiences the migration to the cities, a national phenomenon in our day, it gradually moves from rural dominance to urban dominance. It is during this time of transition that daylightsavings time is an issue in State legislatures. It continues to be an issue until the urban dominance is clearly reflected in legislative numbers. During this period, daylight saving time bills consume time, cause friction, and usually end up in some type of compromise.

I am not going to say more about the problems of the legislature, because we have one of the more articulate members of the State legislature who is here and will be speaking to you. But it has been a problem in the Minnesota State Legislature over the years, it has consumed time, and it is not likely to be resolved.

In most States, the daylight saving time argument is simply a difference in viewpoint between the majority of farm people and the majority of urban dwellers. Speaking for a chamber of commerce, I do not suppose I should be speaking for the farmer, but as a renegade farmer, I know that the farmer does have some problem with daylight saving time. The dairyman, for example, must either shift the milking time of his herd by 1 hour twice during the year or start and end his workday an hour later than normal. The latter solution may not be satisfactory from the standpoint of getting to church, business, or social functions in town in the evening.

The grain-oriented farmer, however, has a problem during the harvest season when his working day is regulated by the sun and its effect on the moisture content of the crop he is harvesting.

I think the significant thing here is that it must be noted that in both instances, the duration of daylight saving time is not a factor. In other words, if he has a stake in whether the State goes on daylight saving time or not, he has very little stake in how long it goes on fast time. If Minnesota had it for only 2 months during the summer, it would cover the harvest season and the dairyman would need to change his dairy herd schedule twice. Thus, my point that standardization of beginning and ending dates works no hardship on anyone. Although Minnesota is near the end of this period of daylight saving time argument and confusion, some of our neighboring States are just coming into this period of debate and indecision.

We have gone through this period in Minnesota, are going through it, where the dominant voice which has been rural in the legislative members is becoming urban. All the States all around us, many of the States are going to be going through this in coming years. Passage of this bill will bring immediate order out of chaos which could exist for another 15 years in the upper Midwest.

Gentlemen, we urge favorable action on at least a uniform ending and starting date.

(The prepared statement of Mr. Brandt follows:)

STATEMENT OF LLOYD L. BRANDT, MANAGER, LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT,
MINNEAPOLIS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

The Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce, by resolution of its board of directors, supports the principle of a national uniform daylight saving time law.

Let me tell you a little bit about the situation which prevails in Minnesotaperhaps this can serve as exhibit No. 1 to demonstrate the type of macabre situation that develops without a national law regulating daylight saving time dates. By State statute, all of Minnesota is on daylight saving time as of the fourth Sunday in May. However, some border communities which lie next to Wisconsin and have a close community of interest with Wisconsin neighbors such as Duluth, Winona, and a group of small eastern border towns, will have set their clocks ahead on the last Sunday in April. Should we follow last year's pattern for a 4week period in the spring, St. Paul will be on daylight saving time and Minneapolis on standard time. This really creates some interesting situations. When May 22 arrives, the whole State goes on daylight saving time, except some western border communities which will stay on standard time to conform to neighboring communities in the Dakotas. On the first Tuesday following Labor Day, the State returns to standard time. Again, with the exception of the Wisconsin border communities.

As a result of the confusion, for 6 months, all Minnesota clocks will be the same. For the remaining 6 months, various combinations of time can be found in the State, depending upon the month or day it happens to be. In a poll of our memhership, 97.4 percent of the members stated a preference for daylight saving time. 53.5 percent asked for uniform dates to coincide with other areas. I suspect this is typical of the people in our metropolitan area. I want to discuss, however, the stake that our people have in a uniform time bill.

I don't need to tell you what type of problems are presented to the transportation companies, radio and TV broadcasters, and others.

These are isolated industries and if only they were affected, it might be a tolerable situation. Such is not the case, the efficiency of every major company is affected. We are a grain, finance, and electronics center and for the most part, our community of interest is with the East. The great majority of long-distance phone calls that originate in the Minneapolis area are with eastern connections. During the period that we are on central standard time and the East is on daylight saving time, our time for telephone contact with eastern offices is effectively reduced to less than 2 hours per day.

Some of our members find it necessary to change their operating hours to facilitate better connections with suppliers and customers.

I attach to my remarks a copy of a sheet (app. A) which came to my desk in 1965 announcing the change of trading hours for the Minneapolis Grain Exchange. A change of hours when Chicago went on daylight saving time in April, another

change when Minnesota went on in May, another change on September 6 when Minnesota went off, and a final change when Chicago went off daylight saving time on November 1.

Gentlemen, we are not usually the first organization to ask for Federal intervention in a local matter. In this case, however, we feel justified in requesting your intervention in what has heretofore been a matter decided by the States. This involves commerce across State lines and it is the problem that cannot, or will not be satisfactorily resolved by the States.

Some of you have perhaps sat in State legislatures. You know the problems presented by this type of matter in a legislature divided between rural and urban members.

Minnesota will likely resolve its problem in the next session of the legislature after reapportionment. However, many other State legislatures getting additional urban representation will be facing the same struggle that Minnesota has gone through during the past 8 years. Arguing the matter in legislative halls and finally compromising on daylight saving time, dates generally unsatisfactory to everyone.

The proposal you are considering, although it may be somewhat of a compromise, is a reasonable solution. In Minnesota, and I suspect in most other States, the issue of daylight saving time divides on rural-urban lines. The legislator who has both rural and urban constituents is the man to be pitied.

As a State experiences the migration to the cities, a national phenomenon in our day, it gradually moves from rural dominance to urban dominance. It is during this time of transition that daylight saving time is an issue in State legislatures. It continues to be an issue until the urban dominance is clearly reflected in legislative numbers. During this period, daylight saving time bills consume time, cause friction and usually end up in some type of compromise. If uniform dates are set by Federal statute, the issue becomes clear cut. It doesn't come up in the legislature until there is reason to believe it can be passed. Once it becomes clear that the aye votes carry, the State has daylight saving time for the legal duration-it is no longer an issue. When the beginning and ending dates can be haggled over, it becomes an issue as soon as some proponents think they have enough strength to get some type of compromise bill, even after it beduring this time of transition that daylight saving time is an issue in State legislation, the rural legislator will argue for a shorter time period-hoping for a kind of moral victory. The bills we are talking about here will save days of legislative debate save industry millions of dollars, avoid years of daylight saving time confusion and accomplish this without creating difficulty or hardship for anyone.

In most States, the daylight saving time argument is simply a difference in viewpoint between the majority of farm people and the majority of urban dwellers. I am a renegade farmer and I know that the farmer does have some problem with daylight saving time-the dairyman must either shift the milking time of his herd by 1 hour twice during the year or start and end his workday an hour later than normal. The latter solution may not be satisfactory from the standpoint of getting to church, business, or social functions in town in the evening. The grain-oriented farmer has a problem during the harvest season when his working day is regulated by the sun and its effect on the moisture content of the crop he is harvesting. Again, if he works by the sun and not the clock, he may find a conflict with evening appointments. It must be noted that in both instances the duration of daylight saving time is not a factor. If Minnesota had it for only 2 months in the midsummer, it would cover his harvest season and the dairyman would need to change his dairy herd schedule twice. Thus, my point that standardization of beginning and ending dates works no additional hardship on anyone. It will still be up to the State legislatures to decide if they want daylight saving time at all.

One additional argument has been raised in our legislative debate on the daylight saving time issue. The possible problem of some schoolchildren having to wait for a bus while it is still dark.

I have attached to my remarks, a chart (app. B) that shows the sunrise time (on daylight saving time) in Minnesota during the period of May through October. Considering that schoolchildren are almost never on a bus more than 45 minutes to 1 hour and that daylight precedes sunrise by at least one-half hour, it can be readily seen that this constitutes no real problem.

Although Minnesota is near the end of this period of daylight saving time argument and confusion, some of our neighboring States are just coming into this period of debate and indecision. Passage of this bill will bring immediate order out of chaos which could exist for another 15 years in the upper Midwest. Gentlemen, we urge favorable action.

APPENDIX A

MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE 1965 DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME TRADING HOURS Minneapolis Grain Exchange trading hours beginning April 26, will be 8:30 a.m. to 12:15 p.m., c.s.t., to correspond with Chicago daylight saving time.

Daylight saving in Minnesota begins May 24, and continues through September 6. Trading hours at this exchange beginning Monday, May 24, and ending Friday, September 3, will be 9:30 a.m. to 1:15 p.m., c.d.s.t.

Minnesota daylight saving ends September 6. Therefore trading hours at this exchange beginning Tuesday, September 7, and continuing through October 31 (end of daylight saving in Chicago) will be 8:30 a.m. to 12:15 p.m. c.s.t. Daylight saving in most cities of the Nation will end October 31. Markets then will revert to regular hours Monday, November 1; i.e., 9:30 a.m. to 1:15 p.m., c.s.t. SECRETARY'S OFFICE.

NOTE: Schools in Minnesota generally start at 8:20 - 8:45 a. m. School buses rarely start pickups more than one hour before school starting times.

Prepared by the Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce.

Mr. FRIEDEL. Any questions?

(No response.)

Mr. FRIEDEL. Thank you, very much.

Our next witness will be the Honorable John Tracy Anderson, State representative, St. Paul, Minn.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN TRACY ANDERSON, STATE REPRESENTATIVE, MINNESOTA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 43D DISTRICT SOUTH, ST. PAUL, MINN.

Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, my name is John Tracy Anderson. I am a member of the Minnesota House of Representatives serving the 43d District South, a district entirely within the city limits of St. Paul.

In the last biennial session of the Minnesota Legislature I was an author of a bill which would have extended Minnesota's present 3-month daylight saving time to conform with our neighboring State of Wisconsin. This would, in effect, have given us a 4-month period of d.s.t. While deliberations were being held on my bill, the Wisconsin Legislature extended their d.s.t. to the last Sunday in October. I attempted to amend my bill to conform to Wisconsin's new law-I was not successful. My bill did not pass.

While deliberating the extension of d.s.t. in the Minnesota House and Senate, complete chaos developed in our State. Duluth, Winona, Rochester, and other smaller communities, elected, by city council action, to start d.s.t. when the majority of the other States commenced their d.s.t.-that date being the last Sunday in April. The city council of St. Paul voted to start d.s.t. 2 weeks before the State officially changed to d.s.t. All of the changes to earlier d.s.t. by local governmental units were in violation of Minnesota law.

Consider what happened. The State capitol and State employees were on standard time. St. Paul, the capital city was on d.s.t. Minneapolis, our Twin City, was on standard time. St. Paul schools were on d.s.t., the University of Minnesota's St. Paul and Minneapolis campi observed standard time. It was possible to drive through seven time changes within 100 miles. I'm sure you can understand the confusion created by our illegal "do-it-yourself" system.

I am here to impress upon you the need for favorable congressional action to end the chaotic time conditions endured by Minnesotans, and I am sure, citizens of other States endeavoring to do business with our State.

The following are only a few of the reasons why I, and thousands of Minnesotans believe you should act favorably on a uniform d.s.t. bill:

1. The consensus of thousands of letters, telegrams, and calls indicate a desire that Congress should act.

2. We don't want counties and municipalities to be tempted to break the law by exercising illegal local time changes.

3. Our people want to know what time they can expect to hear their radio and television programs. Our radio and television stations should not be forced to bear the burden of additional expenses for more than one program listing.

4. Our people want to know when their buses, their trains, and their planes are expected to leave and arrive. Our public transport carriers should not be forced to publish multitudinous transportation schedules.