Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The bill amends the Uniform Time Act to allow States to choose, by law, to observe daylight saving time year-round. It also clarifies that a State may exempt itself from DST provisions or apply year-round DST to areas of the State within any time zone.
Health impacts: progressives emphasize circadian harm; conservative downplays it.
Narrow, popular-sounding change with low fiscal impact increases House likelihood; some dissent exists over permanent DST versus standard time.
The bill amends the Uniform Time Act to allow States to choose, by law, to observe daylight saving time year-round.
It also clarifies that a State may exempt itself from DST provisions or apply year-round DST to areas of the State within any time zone.
Content is narrow and non‑fiscal but faces policy disagreements and inter‑chamber hurdles; optional design helps but doesn't guarantee enactment.
How solid the drafting looks.
Health impacts: progressives emphasize circadian harm; conservative downplays it.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Health impacts: progressives emphasize circadian harm; conservative downplays it.
Likely skeptical of permanent daylight saving time because public‑health and safety groups favor permanent standard time.
May appreciate state choice but will emphasize risks to children's safety and circadian health, and call for studies and protections.
Generally open to allowing States discretion, but wants pragmatic safeguards to limit commerce disruptions and health harms.
Will push for coordination, clear federal guidance, and review of costs before broad adoption.
Likely supportive because the bill expands state authority and reduces federal micromanagement.
Will welcome ending clock switching, though some will caution about border confusion and community impacts.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Content is narrow and non‑fiscal but faces policy disagreements and inter‑chamber hurdles; optional design helps but doesn't guarantee enactment.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Health impacts: progressives emphasize circadian harm; conservative downplays it.
Content is narrow and non‑fiscal but faces policy disagreements and inter‑chamber hurdles; optional design helps but doesn't guarantee enac…
Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for To allow States to elect to observe year-round daylight saving…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.