In brief
Trump's remarks have reignited a longstanding debate over daylight saving time, with prominent arguments emerging on both sides regarding health, safety, and economic impacts.
In a bold statement, President-elect Donald Trump has declared his intention to eliminate daylight saving time (DST), claiming it is "inconvenient" and "very costly" for American citizens. This declaration came through a recent post on his Truth Social platform, where he suggested that while there exists a "small but strong constituency" favoring DST, it should not continue. He emphasized that his Republican Party aims to put an end to this seasonal clock-changing tradition.Daylight saving time is a practice where clocks are moved forward by one hour in the spring and set back again in the autumn, a method meant to optimize the use of natural daylight. As reported by the Pew Research Center, about a third of the world, including most European countries, observes DST, but in the U.S., discontent has brewed for some time.Those opposed to DST assert that it disrupts sleep cycles and poses health risks due to the disorientation it brings to schedules. They argue that returning to standard time would be beneficial for overall well-being as it allows for more morning sunlight which can improve sleep patterns. Conversely, advocates for keeping DST or making it permanent argue that it bolsters evening safety by increasing visibility, potentially reducing crime rates, conserving energy, and lowering the likelihood of road accidents.Notably, this isn’t the first time American lawmakers have proposed changes to DST. In 2022, a bill aiming to make DST permanent, known as the Sunshine Protection Act, passed through the Democratic-controlled Senate but ultimately did not reach President Biden's desk. Senator Marco Rubio, who spearheaded the bill and was recently appointed by Trump as the future secretary of state, pointed out studies demonstrating economic benefits from a permanent DST.The practice of changing clocks in the U.S. began in 1918 during World War I for fuel conservation but was met with significant disapproval from farmers and was repealed post-war. It saw a resurgence during World War II and became a permanent fixture in 1966, with states allowed to opt out – a route that states like Hawaii and most of Arizona have taken.Research conducted by Joan Costa-i-Font from the London School of Economics highlights the potential adverse effects of DST on sleep, physical health, and mental well-being, suggesting that eliminating DST could yield an increase in economic output of approximately €754 ($792; £627) per capita per year.Countries that have recently abandoned DST include Mexico and Jordan in 2022, though areas close to the U.S. border still adhere to DST for economic considerations. Meanwhile, Russia and Turkey have opted for a permanent DST in the last decade.In the U.S., a Monmouth University Poll indicates a significant 66% of citizens favor the idea of making DST permanent. As discussions around this topic gain momentum, it remains to be seen how the incoming administration will address such complex concerns.
