by wvenable 9 hours ago

But the reasoning for that was a preference for DST.

Obviously all this is arbitrary including standard time.

throw0101c 7 hours ago | [-1 more]

> But the reasoning for that was a preference for DST.

There was no reasoning for the Dubya alteration: the change was not debated anywhere, and (AIUI) no one was ever able to figure out how it actually got slipped into the legislation.

wvenable 6 hours ago | [-0 more]

The DST extension was included in Section 110 of the 2005 Energy Policy Act, debated as part of the bill, and justified on energy-savings grounds. Congress even required the Department of Energy to study its impact afterwards!