The U.S. House of Representatives voted Tuesday to make daylight saving time permanent, passing legislation that could end the twice-annual clock changes that millions of Americans have participated in for decades. The measure, formally known as the Sunshine Protection Act, cleared the chamber with a bipartisan supermajority of 308 to 117 votes, marking a significant step forward in a long-running congressional effort to eliminate what many view as an outdated practice.
The bill would establish daylight saving time as the permanent standard across the United States beginning in the spring, meaning Americans would no longer set their clocks back to standard time each November. States that already observe standard time year-round, including Hawaii and most of Arizona, would have the option to remain on that schedule if their legislatures act before the measure takes effect. Nineteen states have already passed legislation indicating they would adopt permanent daylight saving time if Congress gives them the authority to do so.
The vote showed strong bipartisan support, with Representatives from both parties voting in favor despite lingering disagreements about the best approach. Rep. Gus Bilirakis, a Florida Republican, said Americans are ready to “ditch the switch,” characterizing the twice-yearly clock change as creating unnecessary disruption. He and other proponents argue that permanent daylight saving time would provide families with more evening daylight for outdoor activities and support local businesses, particularly those in the tourism and entertainment sectors.
President Donald Trump championed the bill’s passage, having publicly pushed Congress to approve the legislation. In a May post on Truth Social after the bill advanced from committee, Trump wrote that the clock changes represent wasteful spending and that it was time people could “stop worrying about the Clock.” He pledged to work hard to see the bill signed into law and said it would be a “very nice WIN for the Republican Party.”
The measure now faces an uncertain future in the Senate, where its chances remain unclear despite prior support for similar legislation. The Senate passed a comparable daylight saving time bill by unanimous consent in 2022, but that measure stalled in the House at the time. More recently, in 2025, a bipartisan group of senators attempted to fast-track a similar bill through unanimous consent, but Republican Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas blocked the effort.
Cotton, who has consistently opposed permanent daylight saving time, raised concerns about the practical implications for Americans in northern and interior states. He warned that winter sunrises could come as late as 9 a.m. or later in some parts of the country, potentially creating hazardous dark morning commutes for school children and workers. His office has not yet indicated whether he would mount similar opposition to the current bill.
The debate over daylight saving time extends beyond Capitol Hill. Sleep experts and medical organizations, including the American Academy of Sleep Medicine and the American Medical Association, have raised concerns about making daylight saving time permanent, arguing that permanent standard time would be more aligned with the human body’s natural circadian rhythms and therefore better for public health and safety. Some lawmakers share these concerns, with Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon of Pennsylvania emerging as an advocate for an alternative approach that would make standard time permanent instead.
The competing visions reflect a broader disagreement among Americans themselves. A 2025 poll from the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that while Americans overwhelmingly dislike changing their clocks twice yearly, they remain divided on which time standard should be permanent. The survey showed 56 percent of adults would prefer permanent daylight saving time for the extra evening daylight, while about 40 percent favor permanent standard time.
The bill’s supporters point to a range of potential benefits beyond just convenience. Proponents argue that keeping clocks on daylight saving time would reduce sleep disruptions in spring, improve mental health by providing more daylight during active hours, boost economic activity and recreational opportunities, and potentially reduce evening crime. They note that Congress has repeatedly heard from Americans expressing frustration with the annual ritual.
However, the bill faces significant opposition from farming communities and agricultural interests, who argue that permanent daylight saving time would disrupt their carefully choreographed schedules. Farmers depend on natural sunlight rather than clock time to organize their work, and livestock operations require consistency in daily routines. The later winter sunrises that would result from permanent daylight saving time present particular challenges in northern agricultural regions.
The daylight saving time debate has a troubled historical precedent. In 1974, during an energy crisis, President Richard Nixon signed a bill making daylight saving time permanent nationwide. The measure proved deeply unpopular when Americans experienced dark early mornings during the winter months, with particular concerns about children waiting for school buses and traveling to school in darkness. By October of that year, less than a year after implementation, Congress voted to repeal the measure and return to the twice-yearly clock changes.
That 1974 episode regularly surfaces in discussions of current proposals, with opponents warning that Congress risks repeating past mistakes. Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, while supporting the bill, questioned whether it represented the best use of Congress’s time, noting that Americans face more pressing challenges related to housing, groceries, utilities, and healthcare costs.
The House’s passage of the Sunshine Protection Act represents the first time the chamber has approved such legislation, though the Senate’s ultimate decision remains in doubt. If the bill clears the Senate and reaches Trump’s desk, it would mark a historic shift in how Americans experience timekeeping and could finally put to rest the decades-long debate over whether the nation should continue its biannual clock adjustments.