Martina Jaureguy Will the Argentine sun start shining “earlier”? The question began to loom over water cooler talk and social media debates after the lower house unexpectedly passed a bill on Thursday that would change the country’s time zone during the winter.
The provision is now set to be addressed by the Senate.
If the bill passes, Argentines would have to set their clocks back one hour in April until August in line with the GMT-4 time zone and set them back to GMT-3 (one hour forward) in September until March. This would place the country in the same time zone as New York and Washington and widen its gap with the United Kingdom and Europe.
In practical terms, the change would mean that in Buenos Aires, for example, in August the sun would rise at 6:30 a.m. instead of 7:30 a.m. and would set at 5:30 p.m. instead of 6:30 p.m.
The provision has stirred intense debate between supporters and opponents. While enthusiasts point to the benefits of more sun in the early morning, critics say it goes against deeply ingrained traditions. In a country used to having dinner at 9 p.m. and going to bed around midnight, a slight tweak to the clock hands could potentially clash with the Argentine lifestyle.
The pros and cons
The bill received scant attention in the lead-up to the vote as the public was focused on discussions regarding President Javier Milei’s vetoes on a pension hike and disability funds. Many Argentines awoke to the surprise that lawmakers had approved the time zone change proposal with 151 votes in favor, 66 against, and 8 abstentions.
Deputy Julio Cobos, who filed the proposal, said that the goal is to “improve performance and optimize the use of natural light” by “better synchronizing official and solar time.” The bill states that the gap between them “not only affects power use but also the performance of school students and shops.”
The proposal went on to say that a smaller gap would also help “activate” people’s circadian rhythms, which regulate sleep.
“Argentina has a mismatch between the official time (-3) and the time zone that is actually right for us (-4),” Cobos said in his X account.
Although Argentina shares the GMT-3 time zone with eastern Brazil and all of Uruguay, most of the country actually should fall under the -4 time zone. The westernmost areas, closer to the Andes mountain range, should technically be within the -5 time zone. Paraguay, Bolivia, Venezuela, and Chile, as well as most of Brazil, currently use the -4 time zone.
Biologist and CONICET researcher Diego Golombek defended the time zone change, saying that Argentina would get additional sunlight in the mornings, something that the body needs for “correct synchronization,” but said that the bill’s problem is the alternation between summer and winter time.
“This does not work. We should stay in the correct time zone the entire year,” he wrote on X, arguing that “time changes always cause bodily disorders and more accidents.”
Many users on the social network complained about the idea of earlier starts and less sunlight in the evening. “We have different traditions in Argentina. Most people start working at 8/9 a.m., not 6. We leave work at 5/6 p.m. With this [change], it would be night in winter (=more mugging). We have dinner at 9/10 p.m., not at 6 p.m. like in the U.S.,” one user wrote in response to one of Golombek’s posts.
Others argued that the change would work differently in each province in Argentina. While those closer to the Andes would be benefitted, residents of the south could potentially see even less sun than they do now.
A man living in Ushuaia pointed out that in the current time zone, the sun currently rises around noon and begins to set at 3 p.m.
“With GMT-4, we would be in penumbra at 2 p.m., and it would be dark at 4 p.m. What is the advantage of the sun rising an hour earlier if at 11 a.m. kids have already been at school for hours?” the man wrote on X.