The House Rules Committee voted 6-4 on Monday to advance the Sunshine Protection Act to the full chamber floor, bringing Congress closer than it has been in years to ending the twice-yearly ritual of changing the clocks. The bill, authored by Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.) and backed by President Donald Trump, would let states lock in daylight saving time year-round, with an option to opt out.
It sounds simple. That is part of the appeal. And for once, a piece of legislation moving through the House has almost nothing to do with partisan trench warfare. The Sunshine Protection Act sailed through the House Energy and Commerce Committee 48-1 in May, with only Rep. Nanette Barragán (D-Calif.) voting no. The Senate unanimously passed a version of the same bill back in 2022, though it died in the House before reaching the president's desk.
Now, with Trump publicly pushing the measure and roughly 20 states already sitting on legislation that would make daylight saving time permanent the moment Congress gives the green light, the bill has real momentum.
The president made his position clear in a written statement following the bill's committee advancement:
"It's time that people can stop worrying about the 'Clock,' not to mention all of the work and money that is spent on this ridiculous, twice-yearly production. It will also be a very nice WIN for the Republican Party. Take it! We are going with the far more popular alternative, Saving Daylight, which gives you a longer, brighter Day, And who can be against that, This is an easy one!"
Trump has repeatedly urged Congress to act on this front. His endorsement adds political weight to a bill that already enjoys broad bipartisan support, a rarity in today's Washington.
Chairman Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) framed the measure in practical terms during the Rules Committee markup. He pointed to the policy's popularity and its tangible effects on daily life, as the New York Post reported:
"Americans are overwhelmingly supportive of this policy and want to end the practice of 'springing forward' and 'falling back.' Locking the clock all year long would have positive impacts on sleep schedules, energy conservation, motor vehicle safety, and our economy."
Guthrie also noted the lifestyle benefits: more time for outdoor exercise, family visits, concerts, sporting events, and retail foot traffic.
The Sunshine Protection Act is not new. The Senate passed it unanimously in 2022 with backing from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. AP News reported at the time that Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts championed the effort, saying permanent daylight saving time would mean "no more switching clocks, more daylight hours to spend outside after school and after work, and more smiles." Republican Sen. Rick Scott of Florida called the biannual clock change "outdated and unnecessary."
But the House never acted on that version. Opposition centered on concerns about darker winter mornings, particularly for schoolchildren waiting at bus stops. That same concern resurfaced during Monday's Rules Committee session.
Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Pa.) proposed an amendment drawn from her co-sponsored Sunshine for Our Kids Act, which would have made permanent standard time, not daylight saving time, the nationwide default. The committee rejected her amendment. Scanlon argued that permanent daylight saving time poses health and safety risks for children, and she pointed to the 1974 experiment as a cautionary tale.
That year, Congress tried year-round daylight saving time. The public backlash was swift and broad enough that lawmakers reversed course. The darker mornings proved deeply unpopular, especially among parents.
Several unnamed medical organizations cited in the debate have argued that permanent standard time would be the healthier option, contending it aligns more closely with the body's natural circadian rhythms. Proponents of the current bill counter with claims about reduced traffic accidents, lower crime rates, and benefits to outdoor recreation and tourism.
The bill's author, Rep. Buchanan, has been pushing this effort for years. In a May news release, he laid out the argument in plain terms:
"Floridians and Americans across the country are tired of the biannual time change, and the evidence is clear that permanent daylight saving time can improve public health, reduce traffic accidents, lower crime and encourage more outdoor activity. Ending the clock change is a commonsense reform that will improve everyday life for millions of Americans."
Florida is among the roughly 20 states, including Alabama, South Carolina, Oregon, and Maine, that have already passed legislation to make daylight saving time permanent, contingent on federal authorization. Hawaii and most of Arizona are the only parts of the country currently exempt from the twice-yearly clock change. The Sunshine Protection Act's earlier committee passage signaled just how little resistance the bill faces among rank-and-file members.
The bill's opt-out provision is designed to address federalism concerns. States that prefer the current system, or that want to explore permanent standard time on their own terms, would not be forced into permanent daylight saving time.
The most pointed criticism of the bill came not from Democrats but from a fellow Republican. Rep. Keith Self (R-Texas), a member of the House Freedom Caucus, wrote on Monday:
"Republicans are majoring in the minors, fiddling with the clocks while the country burns."
Self's objection is less about the substance of the bill than about legislative priorities. With the House juggling the SAVE America Act, which has passed the chamber multiple times but stalled against the Senate filibuster, and other major policy fights, some conservatives see the daylight saving push as a distraction. The broader Republican legislative agenda has been moving at a rapid clip, with Senate Republicans recently pushing through dozens of Trump nominees in a single day.
Self's criticism carries a kernel of truth. The country faces serious challenges on the border, in the economy, and in the courts. But the counterargument is straightforward: popular, bipartisan bills that solve a genuine annoyance for millions of Americans are exactly the kind of thing Congress should be able to handle while also tackling harder problems.
The legislative calendar is not a zero-sum game, or at least it shouldn't be. Congress has managed to advance major legislation on multiple fronts simultaneously when members have the will to do so.
The Rules Committee vote sets up a full House floor vote, though no specific date has been announced. If the House passes the Sunshine Protection Act, it would still need to clear the Senate, where the 2022 version passed unanimously, and reach the president's desk. Given Trump's vocal support, a signature would be all but certain.
The real question is whether the Senate can move quickly enough, and whether the filibuster or competing priorities slow things down again. The 2022 experience showed that unanimous Senate support means nothing if the House lets the clock run out. This time, the House is moving first.
Barragán's lone dissent in the Energy and Commerce Committee and Scanlon's rejected amendment suggest the opposition, while sincere, lacks the numbers to block the bill. The health concerns raised by advocates of permanent standard time deserve honest consideration. But the political math is lopsided. When a bill passes one committee 48-1 and clears the Rules Committee 6-4, the path to passage is wide open.
The broader pattern of institutional decisions moving forward this session suggests a Congress that, for all its dysfunction, can still act when the stars align.
And on this one, the stars, or at least the sun, seem to be cooperating.
If Congress can't manage to pass a bill that nearly everyone agrees on, that the president wants, and that twenty states are already waiting for, then the institution's problems run deeper than anyone's circadian rhythm.
