President-elect Donald Trump has announced his intent to abolish Daylight Saving Time (DST), calling it an outdated and costly practice that disrupts daily life and poses risks to public health. In a recent post on Truth Social, Trump emphasized the need to eliminate the biannual time changes that many Americans find disruptive.
“The Republican Party will use its best efforts to eliminate Daylight Saving Time, which has a small but strong constituency, but shouldn’t!” Trump wrote. “Daylight Saving Time is inconvenient, and very costly to our Nation.”
The push to abolish DST comes as debates around its utility and impact on health and productivity gain traction nationwide. Trump’s remarks signal a potential shift in federal policy that could end the nearly 60-year-old practice.
Daylight Saving Time was standardized in the United States under the Uniform Time Act of 1966. Originally intended to conserve energy by maximizing daylight during waking hours, the practice involves setting clocks forward by one hour in the spring and reverting them in the fall.
While it was initially adopted as a wartime measure to save fuel, DST has since faced growing scrutiny over its effectiveness in the modern era. Studies have found minimal energy savings and increasing evidence of adverse health effects linked to the time changes.
Research highlights a range of health and productivity concerns associated with DST. The spring transition, when clocks are set forward by an hour, is particularly problematic.
- Heart Attacks and Stroke Risks: Studies from the University of Michigan show that heart attack risks increase by 24% on the Monday following the springtime shift. Stroke incidents also rise in the days after the transition.
- Sleep Deprivation: The disruption to the sleep-wake cycle causes “social jet lag,” where individuals struggle to align their internal clocks with their daily schedules. Chronic sleep loss has been linked to mood disturbances, increased suicide risks, and higher accident rates.
- Workplace Injuries and Cyberloafing: A report from the New York Times estimates that the U.S. economy loses $434 million annually due to decreased productivity, workplace injuries, and time wasted on non-work-related internet activities during DST transitions.
Trump’s recent statement adds to his previous remarks about DST. In 2019, he expressed openness to making Daylight Saving Time permanent, which would eliminate the biannual time changes while keeping the extended daylight hours of DST year-round.
Advocates of this approach argue that a permanent standard could reduce the negative effects of time changes while retaining the benefits of more evening daylight. However, critics note that permanent DST would mean darker mornings in the winter, potentially affecting schoolchildren and early morning commuters.
Public sentiment has increasingly turned against DST in recent years. According to polls, a majority of Americans favor ending the time changes altogether. States like Florida and California have already passed measures to make DST permanent, but federal approval is required for such changes to take effect.
In 2022, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed the Sunshine Protection Act, a bill that sought to make DST permanent nationwide. However, the legislation stalled in the House of Representatives, leaving the future of DST uncertain.
Trump’s pledge to abolish DST aligns with his broader vision of simplifying policies he views as outdated or inefficient. By eliminating DST, Trump aims to reduce disruptions to American life and improve public health and productivity.
Critics of DST argue that the practice has outlived its original purpose. Modern lighting and energy-efficient technologies have significantly reduced the energy-saving benefits once attributed to the time changes. Meanwhile, the costs—both financial and personal—continue to mount.
Trump’s commitment to ending DST adds momentum to the national debate. If he succeeds in his efforts, it could mark the end of a practice that has divided public opinion for decades.
Advocates for abolishing DST argue that the change would simplify timekeeping, improve health outcomes, and boost productivity. Opponents, however, caution against the potential drawbacks of darker winter mornings and the challenges of transitioning to a new system.
As Trump prepares to take office, his administration will likely face both support and resistance in pursuing this policy. However, his stance reflects a growing recognition of the need to reevaluate long-standing practices that no longer serve their intended purposes.
The debate over Daylight Saving Time is far from settled, but Trump’s strong stance has reignited conversations about its future. Whether his administration can rally bipartisan support for change remains to be seen. For now, millions of Americans continue to grapple with the biannual clock changes and their far-reaching effects on health, productivity, and daily life.
