WASHINGTON (NEXSTAR) – Lawmakers are once again asking whether it’s time to stop changing the clocks. Members of Congress examined the impacts of Daylight Saving Time during a Senate hearing Thursday, weighing whether the U.S. should “fall back” or “spring forward” for good.
“We can see that this practice is more than an annoyance,” said Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas/) who led the hearing on ending the biannual time change.
Scott Yates, founder of the Stop the Clock Movement, testified that the decades-old practice disrupts daily life and should end.
“It’s something that we’ve been stuck with since World War I, and this is our opportunity to finally fix it,” Yates said.
While lawmakers on both sides agreed it’s time to “lock the clock,” they remain split on which time to make permanent: Standard Time or Daylight Saving Time.
Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) pointed to health concerns and noted that the American Academy of Neurology supports permanent Standard Time, which better aligns with human circadian rhythms.
“More people will actually, naturally, because their circadian rhythms start saying ‘get up on time’ rather than ‘get up so late,’ be able to be ready for the day,” said Dr. Karin Johnson, American Academy of Sleep Medicine Member said at the hearing.
However, business owners and industry advocates argued for permanent Daylight Saving Time, citing potential economic benefits.
“As business owners, they’ll be able to pay the bills a little bit better and reinvest in their businesses,” said Jay Karen, National Golf Course Owners Association CEO.
Still, Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) cautioned that a one-size-fits-all policy may not work nationwide.
“States are in a better position to evaluate how changes in daylight hours affect school schedules, commuting patterns, public safety, and economic activity,” Young said.
President Donald Trump previously vowed to eliminate Daylight Saving Time but recently called the issue a “50/50” debate.
For now, the clocks continue to change, though lawmakers appear increasingly eager to stop the ticking debate.