Given that the bills in various states all require Congressional action, I would expect that Congress would set an "effective" date for a bill permitting permanent DST. This would supersede any state-level legislation. So while the concerns are valid, I think it will be easier to convince Congress of the havoc it would cause were it *not* coordinated than to convince up to 50 state legislatures of the same.

Jacob Pratt

On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 3:08 AM Clive D.W. Feather via tz <tz@iana.org> wrote:

Arthur David Olson via tz said:
> Alas, if the contingencies are met there may be short lead time before
> a change:
> Section 1 of this Act shall take effect on the earlier of the second
> Sunday of March or the first Sunday of November
> after the [contigencies have been met]â¦

I would suggest:

Section 1 of this Act shall take effect on the first Sunday of November
of the first calendar year after the [contigencies have been met]

That's relatively easy to explain and gives at least 10 months warning.

Of course, you need *all* the states that are listed in the contingencies
to use the same rule, or you'll have a year or two when they're out of
sync.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | If you lie to the compiler,
Email: clive@davros.org | it will get its revenge.
Web: http://www.davros.org | - Henry Spencer
Mobile: +44 7973 377646