Summary: The Senate is considering a bill passed by the House that would end the twice-yearly clock changes and keep daylight saving time in effect year-round. Senate leaders say it is unclear whether the measure can secure the 60 votes needed in the chamber. The House approved the bill in a 308-117 vote. Proponents point to potential reductions in sleep disruption, workplace injuries and road accidents, while critics emphasize later winter sunrises that would leave many people traveling and working in darkness.
Senate leaders are weighing legislation approved by the House that would establish permanent daylight saving time across much of the United States, but top Republicans in the chamber say it is not yet certain the bill can win the supermajority needed for passage.
"We’re looking at it. You know the House had a big vote. There’s a lot of interest in it from members on our side over here. Some for, some against," Senate Majority Leader John Thune said, describing the range of views among senators. Asked directly whether he could support the proposal, Thune replied: "I’m from a northern clime. I voted against it in committee." The comment echoed concerns about darker winter mornings in higher latitudes.
The measure, which the House approved by a 308-117 margin, would stop the practice of setting clocks back to standard time each November. Under the bill, clocks would remain on daylight saving time year-round. The legislation would also allow states to opt out of year-round daylight saving time - in particular, states that currently do not observe daylight saving time or states that previously voted to adopt permanent standard time before any federal change was made.
Supporters of ending the biannual clock changes argue that switching the clocks twice a year disrupts people’s sleep cycles, contributes to workplace injuries and plays a role in an increase in road accidents. They contend that keeping clocks an hour ahead through the winter would provide more evening daylight and could support greater economic activity in the winter months.
Opponents counter that permanent daylight saving time would push sunrise later during the winter, producing darker mornings for children heading to school and for commuters, construction workers, farmers and others who begin their days early. In some regions, critics note, the sun would not rise until nearly 9 a.m. or later at the height of winter if clocks remained on daylight saving time year-round.
President Donald Trump has repeatedly urged an end to the twice-yearly clock changes and has strongly backed the legislation.
The bill faces opposition from Senator Tom Cotton and other Senate Republicans. Cotton has argued that keeping daylight saving time year-round would lead to very late winter sunrises and force children in many parts of the country to attend school in darkness.
Historically, the United States has previously implemented year-round daylight saving time. The country used it during World War Two, and it was enacted again in 1974 with the goal of reducing energy consumption. That 1974 effort proved unpopular and Congress repealed the measure later that same year.
At present, the bill is under review in the Senate, and its prospects hinge on whether it can attract the 60 votes required for passage in that chamber. Senate leaders and members are expressing a mix of support and opposition as the legislative process continues.
Key points
- The House of Representatives approved the measure to make daylight saving time permanent by a 308-117 vote.
- Senate Majority Leader John Thune said it is unclear whether the bill can secure the 60 votes needed in the Senate; senators are divided.
- Supporters point to potential benefits for sleep, safety and winter economic activity, while opponents warn of much later winter sunrises affecting children and early-morning workers.
Risks and uncertainties
- Legislative uncertainty - It is unclear if the bill can reach the 60-vote threshold in the Senate, which affects the likelihood of enactment and any downstream policy or operational changes.
- Public safety and scheduling impacts - If enacted, later winter sunrises could increase safety and scheduling concerns for students, commuters, construction workers and farmers, particularly in higher-latitude regions.
- State-level variability - The provision allowing states to opt out means there could be uneven application across states, producing differing local schedules and potential coordination challenges.