The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a bill to make daylight saving time permanent, ending the twice-yearly ritual of adjusting clocks. The measure, known as the Sunshine Protection Act of 2025, received 308 votes in favor and 117 against. The bill aims to eliminate the annual time changes, which occur in the spring and autumn, and instead fix the clocks permanently at the daylight saving time setting. The legislation now moves to the Senate, where its future remains uncertain. The bill passed with bipartisan support, though not universally. Twenty-two Republicans and 95 Democrats opposed the measure. Among the supporters were prominent figures such as Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-FL), who introduced the bill, and Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-NJ). Buchanan emphasized that Floridians and other Americans are tired of the biannual time change, noting that research suggests permanent daylight saving time could lead to improvements in public health, fewer traffic accidents, and more outdoor activity. He described the current system as an outdated and unnecessary burden on daily life. President Donald Trump has voiced strong support for the bill, calling it a "great news for America" after its passage in the House. On Truth Social, he stated that the bill would save hundreds of millions of dollars annually by eliminating the costs associated with changing clocks. Trump also claimed the measure would be a "very nice win for the Republican Party" and pledged to work toward getting it signed into law. His endorsement adds political weight to the legislation, especially given his influence in the Republican Party. The bill's passage follows years of advocacy and previous attempts to enact similar legislation. A comparable bill was passed by the Senate in 2022 but failed to gain traction in the House. Now, with the House approving the measure, attention turns to the Senate, where the outlook is less certain. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has indicated that the primary challenge lies in addressing the concerns of senators who worry about the impact of permanent daylight saving time on communities in northern regions, where winters are longer and darker. Some senators have expressed reservations about the potential for increased darkness in the morning, affecting schoolchildren and commuters. Several senators have previously opposed similar bills, including Republican Sens. Ted Budd (NC), Deb Fischer (NE), Jerry Moran (KS), Tim Sheehy (MT), Dan Sullivan (AK), Roger Wicker (MS), and Todd Young (IN). On the Democratic side, Sens. Lisa Blunt Rochester (DE), Tammy Duckworth (IL), Amy Klobuchar (MN), Gary Peters (MI), and Jacky Rosen (NV) have also raised concerns. Thune himself has not publicly endorsed the bill, citing the geographical divide as a key factor in the Senate's hesitation. The proposed change would mean that most states would remain on daylight saving time throughout the year, effectively moving their clocks forward by one hour compared to standard time. However, Hawaii and most of Arizona, along with several U.S. territories, would continue to follow standard time. The bill would grant these areas the right to maintain their current practices even if the new law is enacted. Supporters of the bill argue that the change would benefit the economy, public health, and safety. They cite studies indicating that the transition to daylight saving time in the spring is linked to an increase in traffic fatalities and a rise in heart-related incidents. Opponents counter that maintaining standard time would better align with natural circadian rhythms and provide more morning light, which is crucial for early risers and students. The bill's journey through Congress reflects broader debates about the role of federal versus state authority in regulating time zones and the balance between convenience and biological considerations. With the House having passed the measure, the focus now shifts to the Senate, where the outcome will determine whether the United States finally moves away from the twice-yearly clock changes.
8 reports
The New York Times (US)Independent🔒CenterFactual 65Objective 708 days agoThe U.S. House of Representatives has passed a bill aimed at making daylight saving time permanent, eliminating the need for the twice-yearly clock changes. This bipartisan effort reflects growing public support for ending the practice, which many find inconvenient and disruptive. However, the bill now faces uncertainty in the Senate, where it may encounter opposition or require significant modifications before it can become law. The issue has sparked debate over energy efficiency, health impacts, and economic effects associated with changing the clocks. While the House vote represents a step forward, the path to enactment remains unclear.
Bias read (Center): The article presents the event neutrally, noting bipartisan support in the House while acknowledging potential challenges in the Senate. It does not exhibit overtly biased language, one-sided sourcing, or omission of context. The framing is balanced, focusing on the legislative process and the issue
Why factuality (65): The article accurately reports on the House vote and the potential health benefits of ending daylight saving time changes, referencing the American Heart Association's findings. It provides context about the bill's provisions and political backing.
Why objectivity (70): The tone remains neutral, focusing on the legislative process and supporting arguments without showing significant bias toward either side of the debate.
NewsweekIndependentCenterFactual 65Objective 709 days agoA proposed U.S. law, the Sunshine Protection Act of 2025, aims to make daylight saving time permanent across the country, eliminating the need for twice-yearly clock changes. If passed by Congress and signed by President Donald Trump, this legislation would shift standard time forward by one hour, meaning most Americans would remain on daylight saving time throughout the year, including during winter months. This change would result in later sunrises and later sunsets during the winter, though it would not increase total daylight hours. Supporters argue that this would reduce disruptions caused by clock changes and potentially benefit public health and safety. However, critics raise concerns about darker mornings, especially affecting schoolchildren and commuters, citing past negative experiences during the 1970s energy crisis when similar policies were briefly implemented.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both sides of the debate regarding the proposed legislation, highlighting arguments from supporters who emphasize reduced disruption and potential benefits, while also acknowledging concerns raised by critics about darker mornings. There is no evident bias toward either side, as
Why factuality (65): The article accurately reports on the House vote and the bill's provisions, mentioning the health and economic arguments made by proponents. It includes quotes from lawmakers and outlines the next steps in the legislative process.
Why objectivity (70): The tone is neutral, providing factual updates on the bill's progress and the differing viewpoints from lawmakers without expressing personal opinion.
Breitbart NewsIndependentConservativeFactual 65Objective 658 days agoThe U.S. House of Representatives passed the Sunshine Protection Act of 2025, which aims to make daylight saving time (DST) permanent and eliminate the biannual clock changes. The bill passed with strong bipartisan support, but faced opposition from some members of both major parties. President Donald Trump endorsed the legislation, emphasizing the financial burden of changing clocks and claiming it would benefit the Republican Party. Supporters argue that permanent DST could improve public health, reduce traffic accidents, and encourage outdoor activity. However, critics point to research indicating that DST increases electricity demand and poses risks such as higher traffic fatalities and increased stroke risk due to disrupted sleep patterns.
Bias read (Conservative): The article emphasizes support from President Trump and highlights the potential benefits of the bill for the Republican Party, while selectively citing studies that criticize DST. It frames the issue as a partisan win for Republicans and omits balanced perspectives on the debate over DST's impacts.
Why factuality (65): The article accurately reports on the House vote and the bill's provisions, including the bipartisan support and the potential health benefits. It includes quotes from lawmakers and outlines the bill's implications.
Why objectivity (65): The tone shows some bias, particularly in the way it frames the bill as a 'win' for the Republican Party and emphasizes Trump's support, suggesting a lean towards the political narrative.
CBS News (US)IndependentCenterFactual 60Objective 757 days agoThe U.S. House of Representatives has passed the 'Sunshine Protection Act,' a bill aimed at making daylight saving time permanent and eliminating the biannual clock changes that many Americans find inconvenient. With strong bipartisan support in the House, the next step is for the Senate to consider the legislation. However, the Senate's path forward remains uncertain due to concerns over state autonomy regarding time zones. Senator John Thune, the Senate Majority Leader, has indicated hesitation, citing the need for flexibility for states. Several senators from both major parties have opposed the bill, including Republicans like Tom Cotton and Democrats such as Lisa Blunt Rochester. President Donald Trump has publicly endorsed the bill, calling its House passage 'Great News for America.'
Bias read (Center): The article presents the situation objectively, highlighting both the support and opposition within Congress without overtly favoring any side. It provides balanced quotes from various senators and mentions the potential impact of the bill without taking a stance.
Why factuality (60): The article accurately reports on the House passing the bill and mentions the health concerns related to daylight saving time as cited by the American Heart Association. It provides relevant context about the legislative process and potential outcomes.
Why objectivity (75): The article maintains a balanced tone, discussing both the support for the bill and the uncertainty around its passage in the Senate. It avoids taking a strong partisan stance.
The Daily WireIndependentCenterFactual 60Objective 759 days agoA bipartisan bill backed by former President Donald Trump, known as the Sunshine Protection Act, has advanced in the U.S. House of Representatives after passing the House Rules Committee. The legislation would allow states to choose between observing daylight saving time year-round or switching back to standard time. Trump criticized the current system of adjusting clocks twice a year, calling it a 'ridiculous, twice-yearly production.' Supporters argue that ending the clock changes could improve public health and safety, citing research linking the spring transition to increased heart attacks, strokes, and car crashes. Opponents, including some lawmakers and medical groups, argue that permanent standard time better aligns with natural circadian rhythms and point to public backlash against a previous attempt at year-round daylight saving time in 1974. The bill now faces a vote in the full House, marking another step toward potentially ending the seasonal clock changes.
Bias read (Center): While the article presents both supporting and opposing arguments regarding the Sunshine Protection Act, it does not clearly favor one side over the other. It includes quotes from both Republican supporters and Democratic opponents, as well as references to scientific studies and historical preceden
Why factuality (60): The article accurately describes the proposed changes and references the American Heart Association's research on health impacts. It provides geographical details and explains the potential effects of the bill on sunrise and sunset times.
Why objectivity (75): The article presents information objectively, explaining both the supporters' and critics' perspectives without leaning heavily on one side.
CBS News (US)IndependentCenterFactual 60Objective 708 days ago House passes bill to make daylight saving time permanentThe U.S. House of Representatives has passed the Sunshine Protection Act, a bill aimed at making daylight saving time permanent across the country. The legislation, which passed with a 308 to 117 vote, would eliminate the biannual clock changes that occur in the spring and fall. Supporters argue that the change could benefit sleep patterns, health, and the economy by extending daylight hours in the evenings. Critics warn that permanent daylight saving time could lead to darker mornings during winter, potentially affecting health and safety. The bill now moves to the Senate, where its fate remains uncertain. Previously, a similar bill was passed by the Senate in 2022 but did not reach the House. President Donald Trump has expressed support for both eliminating and permanently implementing daylight saving time, though he recently indicated he would sign the bill if it reaches his desk.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both sides of the debate regarding the permanent implementation of daylight saving time, including arguments from supporters and critics. It does not exhibit strong bias toward either side, providing balanced perspectives and quoting multiple lawmakers and historical context.
Why factuality (60): The article accurately reports on the House vote and the bill's provisions, citing President Trump's support and the potential health benefits. It includes quotes from lawmakers and outlines the bill's implications.
Why objectivity (70): The tone is somewhat biased towards the Republican position, as evidenced by the emphasis on Trump's support and the framing of the bill as a 'commonsense reform.'
The Washington TimesParty-alignedCenterFactual 50Objective 708 days agoThe U.S. House of Representatives passed the Sunshine Protection Act, a bill aimed at making daylight saving time (DST) permanent nationwide. Introduced by Rep. Vern Buchanan, the bill seeks to eliminate the biannual clock change, which has been a recurring legislative issue for over five decades. The measure received bipartisan support, passing with a 308-117 vote, though it faces significant hurdles in the Senate, where similar efforts have previously failed. The bill would shift the national default to permanent DST, overriding the current Uniform Time Act that allows some states to opt out of DST. While proponents argue that DST extends evening daylight and supports economic activity, opponents, including sleep medicine organizations, claim that permanent standard time better aligns with human circadian rhythms. The bill now faces potential Senate consideration, with President Trump indicating support if it reaches his desk.
Bias read (Center): While the bill represents a partisan proposal (introduced by Republicans), the article presents both sides of the debate—supporting DST's economic benefits versus arguments for standard time's health advantages. The framing remains balanced, citing multiple perspectives without overtly favoring one.
Why factuality (50): This article discusses a bill to make daylight saving time permanent, which is unrelated to the primary source document about health risks associated with the time change. As such, it doesn't align with the ground truth provided and lacks direct connection to the health-related claims in the primary
Why objectivity (70): The tone is neutral and informative, presenting the bill and its implications without overt bias. However, it focuses on political aspects rather than health impacts, which diverges from the primary source's focus.
The Daily WireIndependentCenterFactual 50Objective 708 days ago Congress Takes Huge Step Towards Ending Daylight Saving DisasterThe U.S. House of Representatives passed the Sunshine Protection Act, a bill that would make daylight saving time permanent year-round, with bipartisan support. The legislation, backed by President Donald Trump, aims to eliminate the twice-yearly clock changes, which supporters claim cause health and safety risks. The bill would keep clocks set to daylight saving time from March through November, allowing states like Arizona and Hawaii to opt out. Proponents, including Florida lawmakers, argue the change reflects the state's 'Sunshine State' identity and improves practicality. Opponents, such as Maryland Representative Steny Hoyer and Senator Tom Cotton, warn of negative impacts on children's routines and sunrise times. Medical groups counter that permanent standard time better aligns with circadian rhythms. The bill now moves to the Senate.
Bias read (Center): While the article presents arguments from both sides—supporting permanent daylight saving time and opposing it due to health and circadian concerns—it does not clearly favor one side over the other. The framing remains balanced, presenting multiple perspectives without evident ideological leaning. S
Why factuality (50): This article is primarily a reader commentary section and does not provide detailed factual reporting on the bill or its health implications. It focuses on reader opinions rather than objective facts.
Why objectivity (70): The tone is neutral, presenting various reader opinions without taking a definitive stance. It serves as a platform for discussion rather than a news report.
★
Keep the news honest.
ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €5/month.
Become a Supporter
United States
