The U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation on July 14, 2026, that would end the twice yearly changing of clocks and make daylight saving time permanent nationwide. The bill, H.R. 139, the Sunshine Protection Act of 2025, cleared the House Rules Committee by a 6 to 4 vote on July 13, then passed a procedural rule allowing floor debate, H. Res. 1423, by a narrow 215 to 211 margin. On final passage, the House voted 308 to 117 in favor, with 22 Republicans and 95 Democrats voting no, a lopsided bipartisan coalition on both sides of the ledger.
The bill is sponsored by Rep. Vern Buchanan, R-Fla., and had 34 bipartisan cosponsors in the House. It now moves to the Senate, where a companion bill, S. 29, sponsored by Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., has 18 bipartisan cosponsors. President Donald Trump has publicly endorsed the legislation and is expected to sign it if it reaches his desk, but its path through the Senate is uncertain. Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., who opposes the bill on health and safety grounds (see below), is expected to ask Senate Majority Leader John Thune not to bring it to a floor vote, while Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., has publicly urged Thune to schedule one. No Senate floor vote date had been set as of this writing.
Background
Under current federal law, most of the country changes clocks twice a year: forward one hour on the second Sunday in March (the start of daylight saving time) and back one hour on the first Sunday in November (the start of standard time). Hawaii and most of Arizona, along with Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories, already observe permanent standard time year round and are unaffected by this debate.
The Sunshine Protection Act would make daylight saving time (the “spring forward” time, with more evening light) permanent nationwide, eliminating the twice yearly switch. States would be allowed to opt out and choose permanent standard time instead, if their state legislature passes opt out legislation before the federal law takes effect. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 19 states have already passed laws that would move them to permanent daylight saving time if Congress allows it.
This is not the first attempt. In 1973, amid the energy crisis, Congress passed and President Richard Nixon signed a law making daylight saving time permanent on a trial basis. Public support collapsed within months after children were struck and killed by cars while walking to school in pre dawn winter darkness, and Congress reversed course before the two year trial period ended. Later attempts to pass a permanent Sunshine Protection Act, including one that passed the Senate by unanimous consent in 2022, have repeatedly stalled in the House.
What Different Sides Are Saying
Rep. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., argued at the House Energy and Commerce Committee markup that constituents dread the twice yearly clock change and that studies show economic productivity increases with more evening daylight, along with fewer traffic accidents and better quality of life. Fact check: the evidence here is genuinely mixed. A 2008 Department of Energy analysis found that extending daylight saving time saved only about 0.03 percent of national electricity consumption, a negligible amount, and a 2011 peer reviewed study of Indiana found electricity demand actually increased about 1 percent under daylight saving time. Claims of reduced traffic accidents are also contested elsewhere in this debate; see the opposing claims below, which cite different evidence pointing the other way.
President Trump has argued on Truth Social that changing clocks costs “hundreds of millions of dollars” because of equipment used to physically adjust clocks in towers, and separately that permanent daylight saving time would give Americans a “longer, brighter day.” Fact check: both claims do not hold up. FactCheck.org could not find any credible analysis supporting a specific cost figure for physically changing tower clocks, and a longtime daylight saving time historian told the outlet he had never heard that particular claim raised in decades of research on the topic. Separately, switching to permanent daylight saving time does not create a longer or brighter day. It does not add any daylight; it simply shifts an hour of existing daylight from the morning to the evening. A Penn State meteorology professor and an economist who studies the issue both confirmed to FactCheck.org that the total length of daylight in a day is unchanged by which clock system is used.
Rep. Nanette Diaz Barragán, D-Calif., argued that while she also dislikes the twice yearly clock change, permanent daylight saving time specifically poses health and safety risks, citing doctors and sleep scientists who warn it would push sunrise past 8 a.m. for months in many states, harming sleep, mood, concentration, and heart health. Fact check: this claim is well supported by medical organizations. Both the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Sleep Medicine have taken the position that permanent standard time, not permanent daylight saving time, is the better choice for public health, because standard time aligns more closely with the body’s natural circadian rhythm. Dr. Beth Malow, a Vanderbilt sleep medicine professor who has testified before Congress on this issue, told FactCheck.org that permanently switching to daylight saving time would not save costs and is associated with decreased productivity and higher healthcare costs, the opposite of what proponents claim above.
Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., opposed the bill on the Senate floor by pointing to the failed 1973 to 1974 experiment, when children in some states were struck and killed by cars while walking to school in the dark, and warned that permanent daylight saving time would again make winter mornings dark and dangerous for millions of Americans. Fact check: this history is accurate. Contemporary news reporting from 1974, including from Time magazine, documented multiple child pedestrian deaths in dark morning conditions that winter, particularly in Florida, and the public backlash that followed led Congress to end the experiment early.
It is worth noting an underlying point of confusion in this debate: most public opinion polling shows a plurality of Americans prefer ending the clock changes by adopting permanent daylight saving time (evening light) over permanent standard time (morning light), which is the opposite of what most sleep and medical experts recommend. A 2022 CBS News poll found 46 percent favored year round daylight saving time versus 33 percent for year round standard time, with 21 percent preferring to keep switching. A Monmouth University poll that same year found 44 percent favored daylight saving time versus 13 percent for standard time, with 35 percent preferring to keep the current system. Public preference and expert medical guidance point in different directions here, and this piece does not resolve which should carry more weight in the underlying policy decision.
Related Links
- House passes bill to make daylight saving time permanent, The Hill
- House passes Trump-backed bill that would make daylight saving time permanent, NBC News
- Trump’s Push to Make Daylight Saving Time Permanent, FactCheck.org
- H.R. 139, Sunshine Protection Act of 2025, Congress.gov
- Murray calls on Thune to hold floor vote on Sunshine Protection Act
- Sen. Tom Cotton, floor speech opposing the Sunshine Protection Act
- American Academy of Sleep Medicine position statement on permanent standard time
Discussion Questions
- Do you personally prefer more daylight in the morning or in the evening? Why?
- Have the twice yearly clock changes ever affected your sleep, mood, or schedule?
- Do you find the health arguments from sleep experts or the convenience arguments from lawmakers more persuasive?
- Why do you think public opinion favors permanent daylight saving time even though most medical experts recommend permanent standard time instead?
- Should Congress defer to medical expert consensus on a question like this, or is it reasonable for lawmakers to weigh other factors more heavily?
- What lesson, if any, should today’s Congress take from the failed 1973 to 1974 experiment?
- Should states be allowed to opt out and choose their own time system, or should there be one uniform national rule?
- How should elected officials handle a policy question where the evidence on costs and benefits is genuinely mixed?
- Why do you think this issue has such strong bipartisan support and bipartisan opposition at the same time?
- Imagine you are a member of Congress from a northern state. Would you vote for or against this bill, and why?
