Listen to the article
Americans turned their clocks back for daylight saving time this weekend, but a growing bipartisan movement in Congress aims to make this ritual a thing of the past.
Rep. Vern Buchanan, R-Fla., along with Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., have reintroduced the Sunshine Protection Act, legislation that would permanently establish daylight saving time as the standard time nationwide, eliminating the twice-yearly clock changes.
“It’s clear that Americans want to do away with changing their clocks twice a year, and my bill will end this outdated practice,” Buchanan said. “Just recently, I’ve had very promising conversations with House leadership, Energy and Commerce committee members and administration officials about holding hearings and acting on my bill this Congress.”
The bill has garnered substantial bipartisan support, with 18 cosponsors in the Senate and 29 in the House of Representatives. However, progress on the legislation, like many other congressional priorities, remains stalled amid the ongoing 35-day government shutdown.
This isn’t the first time Congress has attempted to address the issue. In 2017, a similar bill led by then-Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., passed the Senate via unanimous consent but was never taken up by the House under then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
Sen. Scott recently attempted to advance the current bill using the same unanimous consent approach, but Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., objected, citing concerns about school children in his state.
“With permanent Daylight Saving Time, for three months out of the year, kids in West Arkansas towns like Bentonville, Fayetteville and Fort Smith would start school in the dark. I will always oppose any effort to adopt Daylight Savings Time year-round,” Cotton stated on social media.
Daylight saving time dates back to 1918, when it was introduced during World War I as a way to extend the workday and conserve fuel by making better use of natural sunlight. At the time, it carried patriotic significance as Americans sought ways to contribute to the war effort.
Today, however, many lawmakers argue the practice causes more problems than it solves. Rep. Jay Obernolte, R-Calif., pointed to research showing biannual time changes increase traffic accidents, disrupt student performance, and negatively impact health.
“Beyond mending broken sleep cycles, ending these clock changes would address real-world problems that families experience twice a year from lost productivity and disrupted routines,” Obernolte said.
Public opinion appears to support ending the practice. A Gallup poll published earlier this year found that 54% of Americans support eliminating the time switch, while 40% favor keeping it, and 6% are undecided.
Rep. Barry Moore, R-Ala., another supporter of the bill, believes most Americans agree on ending the time changes but differ on whether to permanently adopt standard time or daylight saving time.
“The challenge hasn’t been whether we should stop changing the clocks. Most people agree we should. It’s been about which time we should make permanent,” Moore explained. “That back-and-forth has slowed progress in Congress. But I think we’re at a point now where everyone is ready for less bureaucracy and more common sense on this issue.”
Regional differences also play a role in support for the legislation. Rep. Erin Houchin, R-Ind., noted that over 90% of constituents in her rural, agricultural district favor ending the time changes.
“Keeping one consistent schedule would improve public safety, strengthen economic stability, and give farmers more daylight to finish their work,” Houchin said.
While some lawmakers like Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., support the idea in principle, they don’t consider it a top priority compared to issues like healthcare reform and deregulation.
As Congress remains deadlocked over government funding, with the Senate rejecting the GOP’s spending legislation for the 14th time on Tuesday, the fate of the Sunshine Protection Act—like many other legislative initiatives—remains uncertain.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
12 Comments
Kudos to the lawmakers trying to address this issue. Daylight saving time has been around for a long time, but the world has changed a lot since it was first implemented. It’s good to see them taking a fresh look and trying to find a modernized solution.
Yes, it’s a complex issue that deserves thoughtful consideration. I hope the process involves input from a wide range of stakeholders to ensure any reforms have broad support and realistic, positive impacts.
I’m quite skeptical of the claims that Americans overwhelmingly want to end daylight saving time. It seems like a vocal minority is driving this legislation, while the broader public may be more ambivalent. I hope lawmakers take a measured approach and don’t rush into any major changes.
Fair perspective. Public opinion on this issue is likely more nuanced than the headlines suggest. Thorough polling and stakeholder engagement will be important to ensure any reforms truly reflect the will of the people, not just a passionate minority.
As someone who lives in a state that observes daylight saving time, I’ve definitely felt the effects of the time change, both positive and negative. I can understand the desire for consistency, but I’m not convinced that permanent daylight saving time is the right solution. More research is needed.
I agree, the regional differences in how daylight saving time impacts communities is an important factor to consider. A nationwide change may work well in some areas but create challenges in others. A flexible, state-by-state approach could be more appropriate.
As someone who works in the energy sector, I’m particularly interested in how daylight saving time reforms could affect power usage and grid management. Eliminating the biannual time change could have implications for utilities and consumers that need to be carefully evaluated.
That’s a great point. The energy and infrastructure impacts are crucial considerations. Lawmakers should consult experts from the energy industry to fully understand the potential consequences, both positive and negative, of any changes to daylight saving time.
Interesting to see the ongoing debate around daylight saving time. While it may seem like an outdated practice, changing the clocks twice a year has its supporters and critics. I’m curious to see if this latest bill can gain enough momentum to actually pass and establish year-round daylight saving time.
Agreed, it’s a complex issue with valid arguments on both sides. Permanent daylight saving time could have benefits like more daylight hours, but also potential drawbacks that need to be carefully considered.
I’m a bit skeptical about the need to change the clocks at all. While the disruption to our routines may seem minor, the health and economic impacts of daylight saving time can be significant. I hope lawmakers take a measured, evidence-based approach to any reforms.
That’s a fair point. Maintaining the status quo may be better than risking unintended consequences from a hasty change. The impacts on industries, public safety, and individual wellbeing should all be thoroughly evaluated.