No they enacted permanent DST in the 70s. OP is asking for arguments against ending DST. The backlash against permanent DST in the 70s was because kids going to school in the early morning darkness were being hit y cars.
We already tried year-round DST in the 70s. It didn't last through the first year because kids were getting hit by cars on the way to school in the early morning darkness.
Aritcle doesn't appear to have any explanation of why the Democrats fielding a candidate is in any way dependent on what the Republicans are doing. Over in this article it says there are 5 Democratic (and two other Repulicans and two Libertarians).
Are they saying the Montana Democratic party decided to just phone it in with a bunch of nobodies because the incumbent appeared to be running for re-election? And they would have tried to actually find a good candidate had he withdrawn earlier? If so, that's on those people for choosing not to fight for it in the first place.
House seats are required to be filled by a special election. Senate seats the state can do either an appointed replacement or a special election. Looks like Kentucky, North Dakota, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin went with the special election option.
But, like, they do all believe in the same god. They're just arguing over which prophets' teachings were correct.