Newsweek36%
Map Shows How Permanent Daylight Saving Would Impact Each State 53%
By Alice Gibbs52%
7/24/2026, 5:45:09 AM
Keywords: Daylight Savings Time, Sean Duffy, Donald Trump, States, State, Sunshine Protection Act, Legislation
BS Summary: This article contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Optimism Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 23.9% saturation with 248 hits. Analysis detected 1,936 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,039 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 51.8% and a BS Rank of 53% (10,323 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 52.80% of the article peer group.
Americans could see dramatically different effects from permanent daylight saving time depending on where they live, with Southern states emerging as some of the biggest beneficiaries while parts of the Upper Midwest and Northern New England could face some of the largest drawbacks.
The geographic divide is back in focus after the Trump administration urged Congress to make daylight saving time permanent.
According to reporting by Reuters, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy included the proposal in a letter to lawmakers this week, while President Donald Trump has also personally called senators to encourage support for the measure.
The renewed push comes just days after the House passed the Sunshine Protection Act, a bipartisan bill that would end the twice-yearly clock changes and keep much of the country on daylight saving time year-round.
The legislation now faces a more uncertain path in the Senate.
A Newsweek analysis shows that while many states would enjoy lighter evenings and potential economic benefits, the impact would vary significantly based on geography, latitude and position within a time zone.
Newsweek reached out to Secretary Sean Duffy via email for comment.
Map Shows Which States Could Benefit Most
The clearest winners are concentrated across the South, particularly Florida, Texas and much of the Gulf Coast and Southeast.
Florida may gain more than almost any other large state.
Supporters argue that later winter sunsets would boost beach visits, outdoor dining, theme parks and retail activity while avoiding some of the severe winter sunrise issues experienced farther north.
Texas is another state frequently cited by supporters.
The state's large retail, hospitality, outdoor recreation, construction and energy sectors could all benefit from additional evening daylight.
However, Texas also illustrates one of the central tensions in the debate: western parts of the state already experience relatively late sunrises because they sit near the western edge of the Central Time Zone.
States including Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and South Carolina are also positioned to gain from longer usable afternoons and later winter sunsets.
Why Public Health Experts Prefer Standard Time
While a 2026 YouGov poll found that 64 percent of Americans would like it if their clocks no longer changed twice a year, sleep researchers and public-health organizations have often argued that permanent standard time would be healthier.
The American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) has endorsed permanent standard time, arguing it is better aligned with human circadian biology and that morning light plays an important role in regulating sleep, alertness and overall health.
AASM President Dr.
Fariha Abbasi-Feinberg said permanent standard time is "the healthier choice for all Americans" and warned that permanent daylight saving time would delay morning light exposure, making it harder for children and adolescents to wake, learn and travel safely to school during dark winter mornings.
Similar concerns have been raised by the Coalition for Permanent Standard Time, whose members include the National Sleep Foundation, Sleep Research Society and Society for Research on Biological Rhythms.
The coalition argues that darker winter mornings under year-round daylight saving time could leave more schoolchildren and commuters starting their days before sunrise and place the nation's clocks further out of alignment with natural sleep-wake cycles.
Those concerns echo objections raised during the nation's 1974 experiment with permanent daylight saving time, when reports of children waiting for school buses in darkness and growing public unease over late winter sunrises contributed to a sharp decline in support for the policy and ultimately helped spur Congress to reverse course.
Supporters of permanent daylight saving time have argued that later sunsets would provide more usable daylight in the evening and eliminate the disruption caused by changing clocks twice a year.
Rep.
Vern Buchanan of Florida, a longtime sponsor of the Sunshine Protection Act, has argued that permanent daylight saving time would end the "outdated practice" of changing clocks twice a year while giving Americans more daylight in the evening.
Northern States Face The Biggest Trade-Offs
Some states would face much steeper consequences under permanent daylight saving time.
Maine, for example, could experience some of the most problematic winter sunrises in the country, with the sun not rising until after 7:55 a.m. on December 1 in the state capital, and setting again at 5:01 p.m., giving residents just nine hours and six minutes of daylight.
Despite this, Maine has enacted a measure backing permanent daylight saving time if Congress allows it.
Michigan and Wisconsin face similar concerns.
Both states already experience late winter sunrises, and permanent daylight saving time could push sunrise times even later during parts of the year.
Manufacturing-heavy regions where many workers start shifts early could be particularly affected.
Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota could also emerge as centers of opposition.
In addition to extremely dark winter mornings, agricultural communities have historically been skeptical of time changes that alter traditional schedules.
In Michigan, Senator Gary Peters is among senators who have voted against the time shift.
Similarly in South Dakota, Senators John Thune and Mike Rounds have raised concerns about permanent daylight saving time.
Will Permanent Daylight Saving Time Actually Happen?
The House approved the Sunshine Protection Act on July 14 in a 308-117 vote, sending the legislation to the Senate.
Trump has repeatedly endorsed the proposal and the White House has formally expressed support for the bill, arguing it would reduce the costs and inconvenience of changing clocks while improving safety and economic activity.
But several senators from both parties remain skeptical, citing concerns about extremely late winter sunrises in parts of the country.
Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas has been among the lawmakers warning that permanent daylight saving time could push some winter sunrises to 9 a.m. or later, creating difficulties for schools and commuters.
“I will always oppose any effort to adopt daylight savings time year-round,” he previously said publicly.
If the legislation ultimately becomes law, the impact would not be uniform.
States across the South would likely see some of the biggest economic and lifestyle gains, while many northern states could experience some of the country's darkest winter mornings—turning what appears to be a simple clock change into a debate about geography, commerce and public health.
Contact Newsweek editors on this story: John Fitzpatrick and Emma Lee-Sang
Speakers
4speakers13%attributed speech905writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Selected voice
100%flagged-word coverageFariha Abbasi-Feinberg
44 attributed words33% of attributed speech89% writer coverage
Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Analysis
Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.