Politics July 20, 2026 07:02 AM

Senator Warns Senate Showdown Likely Over Bill to Make Daylight Saving Time Permanent

Lawmaker says White House pushed for support as lawmakers debate safety, economic and scheduling impacts

By Derek Hwang
Share
Twitter Reddit Facebook LinkedIn

A measure that would keep the United States on daylight saving time year-round, approved by the House last week, faces significant opposition in the Senate, according to Senator John Kennedy. The bill has drawn support from the White House but also objections from senators concerned about morning darkness for schoolchildren and workers. Senate leaders say the outcome is uncertain.

Senator Warns Senate Showdown Likely Over Bill to Make Daylight Saving Time Permanent
Summarize with
ChatGPT Perplexity Claude Grok Gemini

Key Points

  • A House-passed bill to keep daylight saving time year-round faces significant opposition in the Senate, according to Senator John Kennedy - impacting federal legislative risk.
  • Backers, including the White House, argue that permanent daylight saving time would reduce sleep disruption, workplace injuries and road accidents while providing more evening daylight and potentially boosting winter economic activity - relevant to retail and service sectors.
  • Opponents highlight safety and scheduling concerns for schoolchildren, commuters, construction workers and farmers due to later winter sunrises - affecting education, transportation, construction and agriculture sectors.

A bill cleared by the U.S. House of Representatives last week that would make daylight saving time permanent is likely to encounter a hard-fought contest in the Senate, a U.S. senator said on Monday.

Speaking on the sidelines of the Farnborough air show on July 20, Senator John Kennedy, a Republican, said President Donald Trump had recently called to ask for his backing of legislation that would end the twice-yearly practice of advancing and retreating clocks that has been standard across most of the United States since the 1960s.

Kennedy said he agreed to the president's request but cautioned that support in the upper chamber is far from assured. "It’s going to be a dog fight," he told reporters.

Senator Jeanne Shaheen, a New Hampshire Democrat who is part of a U.S. delegation attending the Farnborough event, said she has mixed views on the change. "I feel it every time we change the clocks," she said, adding that a shift to year-round daylight saving time would result in "putting kids on the bus in the elementary school when it’s still dark in the morning. I appreciate the safety concerns."

Last week, Senate Majority Leader John Thune said it was unclear whether the daylight saving measure could win the 60 votes needed to pass the Senate.


Under the text of the bill, if it were to become law, clocks would not revert to standard time in November. The legislation would still allow states to opt out of year-round daylight saving time if they do not currently observe daylight saving time.

Supporters of the proposal say the practice of changing clocks twice a year disrupts sleep, raises the risk of workplace injuries and contributes to more road accidents. They also argue that keeping clocks an hour ahead throughout the year would provide additional evening daylight and could increase economic activity during the winter months.

Opponents point to the trade-offs created by later sunrises in winter. They note the change would shift morning light later, meaning more children traveling to school, commuters, construction workers, farmers and other early-morning workers would be on the road or at job sites before daylight. In some areas, critics say the sun would not rise until nearly 9 a.m. or later at the height of winter.

The United States has previously experimented with year-round daylight saving time. The practice was implemented during World War Two and was enacted again in 1974 with the aim of reducing energy use, but it proved unpopular and Congress repealed it later that year.

For now, the bill’s passage in the House leaves its fate in the Senate uncertain. Lawmakers and stakeholders remain sharply divided over the safety, scheduling and economic considerations the proposal raises.

Risks

  • Legislative uncertainty - it is unclear whether the bill can secure the 60 votes required in the Senate, which creates policy risk for businesses and sectors that could be affected by a change in timekeeping.
  • Morning darkness and safety concerns - later winter sunrises could increase risks for schoolchildren, commuters and early-morning workers, with implications for transportation and public safety budgets.
  • Operational and scheduling disruptions - sectors dependent on early daylight, such as construction and agriculture, may face logistical challenges if the change is enacted.

More from Politics

House Approves $1.15 Trillion Defense Authorization Amid Partisan Rift Over Iran and Israel Provisions Jul 22, 2026 Why New York’s Mayor Says He Cannot Arrest Israel’s Prime Minister Jul 22, 2026 Justice Department Seeks Detailed Records After New Jersey Voting Registration Glitch Jul 22, 2026 Trump Rallies in Georgia, Presses National Voting Changes as Republicans Warn of Turnout Risks Jul 22, 2026 Anthropic Pledges Additional $20 Million to Political Group Backing AI Regulation Jul 22, 2026