Congress to Vote on Daylight Saving Bill Amid Corporate Interests and Public Health Concerns
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
Lawmakers are preparing to vote on the Sunshine Protection Act, a bill that would eliminate the disruptive annual clock change and enforce daylight saving time year-round, despite warnings from health experts and concerns about corporate influence.
This week, the House is set to vote on the Sunshine Protection Act, a bipartisan measure that would end the November 'fall back' and impose daylight saving time year-round across the United States. The bill, authored by Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.), would allow states like Arizona and Hawaii, which currently reject daylight saving time, to remain on permanent standard time, while forcing other states to decide whether to opt out before the law takes effect.
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), co-sponsoring the Senate version, SB 29, has argued that more daylight after work benefits business and community safety. President Trump, ever eager to please business interests, has voiced support for the measure. This proposal follows a similar 2022 effort that passed the Senate but was blocked in the House, reflecting the ongoing struggle between public well-being and corporate priorities.
Opposition comes from both parties, with Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) warning that permanent daylight saving time could delay sunrise until as late as 9 a.m. in winter for northern and western regions, endangering schoolchildren. Rep. Nanette Diaz Barragán (D-Calif.) has vowed to vote against the bill, citing medical experts who warn that permanent daylight saving time could harm public health, and she supports an alternative bill to make permanent standard time the default.
Experts on circadian rhythms, such as Stanford physiologist Jamie Zeitzer, highlight that the spring-forward shift disrupts sleep and is linked to higher rates of traffic accidents and cardiovascular events. Zeitzer insists that permanent standard time is better aligned with natural light cycles and human health, yet lawmakers continue to prioritize business over science.
Public opinion is clear: a 2025 AP-NORC poll found only 12% of adults support the current system of changing clocks twice a year. Business groups are divided, with some chambers of commerce pushing for longer evening daylight to boost profits, while agricultural workers and golf course owners oppose losing precious morning light. If enacted, this legislation would mark yet another instance where corporate interests threaten to override public health and safety, continuing a long-standing debate that has seen progressive state initiatives like California’s Proposition 7 and recent bills seeking permanent standard time.