Should daylight saving time be permanent?
The House passed the Sunshine Protection Act (H.R. 139), which would make daylight saving time permanent and end the twice-yearly clock change, putting the country on the time it now observes from March to November. Supporters say more evening daylight and no more switching is worth it; sleep scientists counter that if we stop switching, permanent standard time is the healthier choice. It now goes to the Senate. Where do you stand?
Weigh in
The case for
Supporters argue the twice-yearly switch is disruptive and that permanent daylight saving time means more usable evening light year round, which they link to more time outdoors, more evening commerce, and fewer of the health and safety problems tied to changing the clocks.
Source: House Energy and Commerce Committee (supports the bill) →The case against
Sleep and medical groups argue that permanent daylight saving time means dark winter mornings, with people commuting and children heading to school before sunrise. They say standard time better matches the body's internal clock, and that if the country locks the clock it should lock it on standard time.
Source: American Academy of Sleep Medicine (favors permanent standard time) →My Democracy doesn’t take a side — you choose your position below, and your message carries it. Sources represent one organization on each side; they don’t reflect My Democracy’s position.
This campaign is about this bill
H.R. 139: Sunshine Protection Act of 2025What it does
Sunshine Protection Act of 2025This bill makes daylight saving time the new, permanent standard time.States with areas exempt from daylight saving time may choose the standard time for those areas.
Latest action: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. (Jul 15, 2026)
9 more to reach 10
Take Action
What’s your position?
Both sides are laid out above. Your message will carry your position — My Democracy doesn’t take a side.