President Donald Trump on Thursday and Friday publicly urged the U.S. Senate to pass the Sunshine Protection Act, legislation that would make daylight saving time permanent nationwide and eliminate the twice-yearly clock changes. The bill passed the U.S. House in July with bipartisan support but remains pending in the Senate.
Senate push intensifies as president singles out senator
Trump posted on Truth Social that Republicans in the Senate “have to get moving” on the measure, which he has previously called the “No More Changing of Clocks Act.” He specifically named Senator Tom Cotton, R-Ark., as the reason the bill has not advanced, stating Cotton is holding it up “for reasons unknown.” The president argued the change would reduce crime, improve public health, and save energy, while also addressing widespread frustration over clock adjustments.
House already approved measure in July
The House passed the Sunshine Protection Act on July 25 by a bipartisan vote of 308-117. The bill would establish permanent daylight saving time, meaning clocks would no longer need to be adjusted in the spring and fall. Supporters say it would simplify daily life, boost retail and tourism, and improve safety by providing more evening daylight year-round.
Opposition cites winter sunrise concerns
Critics, including Senator Cotton, have raised concerns that permanent daylight saving time would push winter sunrises later in many parts of the country, potentially leaving children walking to school in darkness. Opponents argue the change could pose safety risks and disrupt natural daylight patterns, particularly in northern and western regions where sunrise times would shift significantly.
Health and economic arguments presented
Proponents, including Trump, contend that permanent daylight saving time would reduce crime rates, decrease car accidents involving pedestrians, lower risks of cardiac issues and seasonal depression, and increase time for family activities and outdoor recreation. They also claim it would save energy costs by maximizing natural daylight. Opponents counter that the health and safety benefits are overstated and that the risks of darker mornings outweigh the advantages of brighter evenings.