Trump Urges Senator Tom Cotton to Push Sunshine Protection Act Through Senate

Key facts

According to reporting by Swati Sakshi Mishra, Donald Trump has called on Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas to serve as a pivotal figure in passing the Sunshine Protection Act, demanding that the Republican senator deliver a definitive legislative success on the issue.

The Sunshine Protection Act aims to abolish the long-standing practice of shifting American clocks forward by one hour in mid-March and moving them back by one hour in early November. Under the provisions of the proposed federal statute, the entire nation—with exceptions for territories and states operating under existing federal carve-outs—would adopt daylight saving time permanently, locking in an additional hour of evening sunlight throughout the winter months.

Mishra’s reporting frames Senator Cotton as a central figure in navigating internal Republican strategy regarding federal time policy. While legislative interest in ending the twice-yearly clock change has surfaced repeatedly in Congress, competing proposals and procedural hurdles have repeatedly stymied final passage. By pressing Cotton to push the Sunshine Protection Act across the finish line, Trump has positioned the Arkansas senator to lead internal discussions to break legislative gridlock and build a consensus coalition within the Senate.

Why it matters

Enacting permanent daylight saving time through the Sunshine Protection Act would fundamentally alter daily routines, economic activity, public safety patterns, and health outcomes for more than 330 million Americans. Eliminating the biannual practice of changing clocks would impact industries ranging from retail to agriculture, while shifting daylight hours during winter months.

Under permanent daylight saving time, winter sunrises across large portions of the United States would occur significantly later in the morning. For instance, northern and western edges of standard time zones would experience sunrise after 8:30 a.m. or near 9:00 a.m. during December and January. Conversely, winter evenings would gain an extra hour of light before sunset.

From an economic perspective, commercial groups, retail associations, golf course operators, and outdoor recreational industries have historically advocated for year-round daylight saving time. Industry trade groups argue that extended evening light promotes consumer spending, increases outdoor physical activity, and boosts revenue for leisure businesses after standard working hours.

However, school administrators and agricultural organizations have expressed concerns regarding extended winter morning darkness. Opponents of permanent daylight saving time highlight safety hazards for school children walking to bus stops or traveling during pitch-black morning hours.

From a public health standpoint, the elimination of clock changes is widely supported by sleep specialists, who point to documented increases in motor vehicle crashes, workplace injuries, and cardiovascular events in the days immediately following the spring shift forward. However, medical research organizations remain divided on the ideal solution. While the Sunshine Protection Act selects permanent daylight saving time, leading sleep health organizations argue that permanent standard time is biologically preferable because morning natural light aligns better with human circadian rhythms.

To understand the current effort surrounding the Sunshine Protection Act, it is necessary to examine the broader historical framework governing time standards in the United States, which dates back more than a century to federal wartime legislation.

Daylight saving time was first enacted at the national level during World War I under the Calder Act of 1918, designed to conserve fuel and energy for military production. The measure proved unpopular and was repealed shortly after the war ended. The practice returned during World War II when President Franklin D. Roosevelt reinstituted nationwide year-round daylight saving time, colloquially known as "War Time," between 1942 and 1945.

Following World War II, state and local governments maintained a patchwork of local time policies, creating widespread confusion for transportation systems, radio broadcasts, and interstate commerce. To establish national order, Congress enacted the Uniform Time Act of 1966. This federal statute established standardized start and end dates for daylight saving time across all participating states.

Crucially, the Uniform Time Act of 1966 established two major legal boundaries:

First, states are explicitly permitted to opt out of daylight saving time altogether and remain on permanent standard time year-round. Hawaii and Arizona (with the exception of the Navajo Nation) exercised this statutory right, as did the federal territories of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands.

Second, the law forbids states from unilaterally enacting permanent daylight saving time without an explicit amendment to federal law passed by Congress. Despite this federal restriction, at least 19 state legislatures—including Florida, California, Ohio, and Texas—have passed laws or resolutions over the past decade authorizing permanent daylight saving time, pending federal legislative approval.

Federal attempts to reform time standards gained major momentum in March 2022, when the U.S. Senate unexpectedly passed the Sunshine Protection Act by unanimous consent. Championed by Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, the bill received broad bipartisan support in the Senate. However, the bill stalled in the House of Representatives, where lawmakers declined to bring it to a vote before the 117th Congress concluded. Because unpassed legislation expires at the end of each two-year congressional term, the Sunshine Protection Act required formal reintroduction in subsequent legislative sessions.

Reaction

The directive reported by Swati Sakshi Mishra introduces renewed political dynamics into a long-standing public debate that engages lawmakers, economic sectors, and scientific institutions.

While official formal statements following Trump’s directive to Senator Cotton were not detailed in the reporting, responses in Congress historically align along regional lines rather than party affiliations. Lawmakers from sunbelt states and suburban districts have frequently supported permanent daylight saving time, emphasizing public popularity and evening recreational benefits.

Conversely, scientific and medical associations have responded to legislative pushes for year-round daylight saving time by urging Congress to pivot toward permanent standard time instead. The American Academy of Sleep Medicine, the Sleep Research Society, and the Society for Research on Biological Rhythms have issued formal position statements warning that permanent daylight saving time disrupts social jetlag and morning light exposure, which can negatively impact sleep quality and metabolic health.

What we don't know yet

Several key details regarding the initiative remain unknown in the wake of the reporting by Swati Sakshi Mishra:

First, it is not clear what specific legislative vehicle or procedural mechanism Senator Cotton intends to use to advance the Sunshine Protection Act through the Senate. Options include attempting to attach the bill to must-pass federal funding legislation or seeking another unanimous consent agreement.

Second, the level of active support within the House of Representatives remains unverified. Previous efforts failed to secure floor time in the House, and it is unknown whether House leadership currently views daylight saving reform as a priority.

Third, the reporting does not state whether the proposed bill will maintain a uniform nationwide mandate or include provisions allowing states to retain local opt-out capabilities under standard time.

What to watch

Several concrete developments will determine whether the Sunshine Protection Act progresses through Congress:

This report is based on original reporting published by Swati Sakshi Mishra.