HB139, titled the Sunshine Protection Act of 2025, would make daylight saving time permanent under federal law. The bill repeals the temporary period for daylight saving time in the Uniform Time Act of 1966 and amends related federal timekeeping provisions so that clocks would no longer be set back in the fall or moved forward seasonally. In practical terms, the measure would keep the nation on daylight saving time year-round rather than alternating between standard time and daylight saving time.
The bill also includes a state exemption provision. States or areas that had already opted out of the federal daylight saving time framework before enactment could continue to use either the new permanent daylight saving time standard or their prior standard time arrangement, depending on what the state considers appropriate. The bill is a federal preemption and time-standard amendment that would affect the Uniform Time Act, the Calder Act, and the legal rules governing time observance across states and territories.
Impact
If enacted, HB139 would amend federal time law by repealing the current daylight saving time period and revising statutory references in the Uniform Time Act of 1966 and the Act of March 19, 1918. It would change the default national time regime to permanent daylight saving time, while preserving a limited option for states or areas that had previously exempted themselves from daylight saving time to retain their existing approach or adopt the new standard. The bill would primarily affect state governments, local jurisdictions, businesses, transportation and broadcasting schedules, and residents who experience seasonal clock changes.
Sentiment
The available context shows a neutral-to-supportive posture, with the bill introduced and referred to committee but no recorded votes or committee debate in the provided materials. Because there are no transcripts or roll-call votes, there is no evidence here of organized opposition or formal endorsement in committee. The bill’s title and structure suggest it is part of the recurring effort to end biannual clock changes, a policy that often attracts public interest and bipartisan discussion, but the provided record does not show how members specifically reacted.
Contention
The main point of contention is the policy choice between permanent daylight saving time and permanent standard time, including whether states should retain flexibility to choose their preferred time observance. Supporters of ending clock changes generally argue for consistency and convenience, while opponents often raise concerns about darker winter mornings, health and safety effects, and the impact on local routines. The bill’s state-exemption language may also be debated because it preserves some state-level discretion while still establishing a federal default, which could create differing time rules across jurisdictions.