Daylight saving time starts Sunday with "spring forward"
The semi-annual changing of the clocks is this Sunday when most of the country will "spring forward" into daylight saving time after more than four months in standard time.
Why it matters: Lawmakers' attempts to get rid of the twice-yearly time changes and switch to permanent daylight saving time haven't gained traction.
Catch up quick: President Trump said Thursday it's "hard to get excited" about changing daylight saving time and called it a "50-50 issue."
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) reintroduced the Sunshine Protection Act in January to "lock the clock" and "make Daylight Saving Time the year-round standard."
Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.) introduced companion legislation in the House.
When to change clocks for spring forward 2025
The big picture: The official time switch is 2am local time on Sunday, March 9 — clocks are set forward one hour meaning we "lose" an hour — as daylight saving time.
Sunrise and sunset will be about one hour later on Sunday than on Saturday.
Many devices such as smartphones will automatically change time, and for devices that don't change, it's best to reset them before going to bed Saturday night.
Daylight saving time used to run from April to October, but the Energy Policy Act of 2005 extended it.
It now runs from the second Sunday in March to the first Sunday in November.
Lose an hour Sunday with time change, health effects
Friction point: The time change isn't about just losing one hour of sleep for one night. The downstream effects of the time change can harm your health.
Right after the clocks shift in March, there's a "spike in workplace accidents, road accidents and medical errors due to sleep deprivation and cognitive impairment," James Rowley of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine told Axios' Carly Mallenbaum last year.
Health groups and sleep experts prefer sticking with standard time year-round over daylight saving time because they say it's more aligned with our body clocks.
The time changes also affect sleep schedules and can make it hard for kids and their parents to adjust.
By the numbers: 54% of Americans say they would prefer standard time year-round over daylight saving time, according to a new Gallup poll.
40% of U.S. adults say they are in favor of daylight saving time, while 6% are uncertain.
In 1999, 73% favored daylight saving time, Gallup said.
Why do we have daylight saving time in the U.S.
Flashback: The U.S. first adopted daylight saving time in 1918 as a way to conserve energy.
In the 1970s, the last time Congress made daylight saving time permanent, the decision was reversed in less than a year because the early morning darkness proved dangerous for school children, and public sentiment changed.
States push to get rid of time changes
At least 31 states have considered or are considering 67 bills or resolutions related to daylight saving time in 2025, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures ' tracker.
The legislation is divided between state lawmakers advocating permanent standard time and those who would enact year-round standard time.
Between the lines: Federal law says states can unilaterally move to standard time but must have the approval of Congress to adopt year-round daylight saving time.
Which states don't observe daylight saving time
Hawaii and most of Arizona do not observe daylight saving time, except the Navajo Nation in northeastern Arizona.
U.S. territories, including Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa and the Virgin Islands, observe permanent standard time.
Fall forward 2025: Next time change
What's next: If federal legislation is not approved, clocks will "fall back" to standard time on Sunday, Nov. 2.
More from Axios:
Target CEO: Tariffs will cause food prices to rise in "next couple of days"
Dunkin' spring menu launches, nondairy surcharge removed
Tooth fairy payouts drop to lowest rate in years
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump Celebrates Pride by Defunding LGBTQ+ Support at Suicide Hotline
President Donald Trump is marking Pride Month by slashing specialized counseling services for young LGBTQ+ people who call the National Suicide Hotline. The Department of Health and Human Services' proposed 2026 budget cuts LGBTQ+ youth resources provided by the hotline, also known as 988. Although $520 million is still set aside to fund the organization, government support for LGBTQ-specific counseling will be eliminated. When Trump signed the suicide prevention line into law in 2020, the legislation put in place special counseling for high-risk populations like LGBTQ+ people under the age of 25. The hotline service was required to employ 'specially trained staff and partner organizations' because—the legislation states—queer and trans youth 'are more than 4 times more likely to contemplate suicide than their peers, with 1 in 5 LGBTQ youth and more than 1 in 3 transgender youth reporting attempting suicide.' Less than five years later, a senior administration official told NBC that the money has been reallocated so that it doesn't go to 'radical grooming contractors,' perpetuating a discriminatory stereotype that equates LGBTQ+ individuals or allies with sexual abusers. Rachel Cauley, a spokesperson for the White House's Office of Management and Budget, said that the proposed budget funds 988 but not 'radical gender ideology.' 'It does not... grant taxpayer money to a chat service where children are encouraged to embrace radical gender ideology by 'counselors' without consent or knowledge of their parents,' Cauley said. The contractors that partner with 988 are mental health organizations that typically provide care to the general population and LGBTQ+ people. This includes The Trevor Project, which has long advocated for LGBTQ+ youth. Jaymes Black, The Trevor Project's CEO, said in a statement to NBC: 'Attempts to discredit these life-saving services will not change the reality of what this administration is proposing: the elimination of a national suicide prevention program, run by seven leading crisis contact centers, that has supported over 1.3 million LGBTQ+ youth across the U.S. with best-practice crisis care.' Black, who urged Congress to rethink the proposal, said that 'every young life is worth saving.' The Trump administration chose to announce the move during Pride Month, a season meant to honor queer representation and commemorate the pioneers who paved the way toward equality. The first Pride marches were held in 1970 to honor the one-year anniversary of the 1969 Stonewall Riots, a pivotal event in the LGBTQ+ rights movement. It took nearly 30 years for the U.S. government to officially recognize the significance of the month; in 1999 former president Bill Clinton issued a proclamation recognizing June as 'Gay and Lesbian Pride Month.' Its name was subsequently updated to include other identities, like bisexual, transgender, and queer individuals, by former presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden. It formally became LGBTQ+ Pride Month in 2021. Trump had already signalled that he would officially spite Pride Month last week when White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said that the president has no intention to formally recognize it. 'There are no plans for a proclamation for the month of June,' Leavitt said. 'But I can tell you this president is very proud to be a president for all Americans, regardless of race, religion, or creed.' Trump's critique of 'gender ideology' has been a cornerstone of his second term. He has declared that there are only two biological sexes; scrubbed agency websites of any mention of transgender or intersex people; stripped diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs from the federal government; barred transgender women from women's sports; prevented federal funding from going to transition-related care for minors; and removed transgender people from the military.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Advocates, legislators still trying to expand expired compensation program for radiation exposure
Jun. 10—One year ago, Congress let a federal program end that compensated people who grew sick from mining uranium for nuclear weapons or from living downwind of nuclear weapons tests. In those 12 months, Tina Cordova's cousin died after years of living with a rare brain cancer. Under a proposed expansion of the program, 61-year-old Danny Cordova likely would have qualified for the $100,000 compensation offered to people with specific cancers who lived in specific areas downwind of aboveground nuclear weapons' tests. "Instead, he and his mom lived literally paycheck to paycheck trying to pay for all of the medications he needed," Cordova said. Since the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) program was created in 1990, New Mexican downwinders have been left out, as have uranium mine workers from after 1971. Sen. Ben Ray Luján, D-N.M., has led an effort in the Upper Chamber alongside Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., to expand the program so it includes later uranium mine workers, and people harmed by aboveground nuclear tests in more states — including New Mexico. In January, they reintroduced a bill to extend and expand RECA. "Letting RECA expire is a disgrace to these families and victims," Luján said. "It's an insult to the victims and their families who still struggle to this very day to get help, get the medicine they need, get the treatments for the conditions caused by the negligence of the federal government. For the victims, this story is long from being over. Generational trauma and poor health conditions continue to plague entire families." Although Hawley and Luján's bill passed the Senate twice in the last session of Congress, and was supported by the entire New Mexico delegation, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., never allowed a vote on the companion House bill, sponsored by Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández, D-N.M. The expansion would have included an increased pricetag of $50 billion to $60 billion over 10 years, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office — a cost estimate Luján has disagreed with. Since its inception, RECA has paid out approximately $2.6 billion. There is no accurate estimate of how many New Mexicans would be included if RECA is expanded, according to Luján's office. "We know we have the votes to get this passed now," said Leger Fernández, who plans to reintroduce the bill in the House. "They keep raising issues with regards to the cost... These are people's lives, and so we need to keep bringing it back to that issue. And in many ways, I think that we are doing this in a bicameral manner, and that the pressure that is being brought from the Senate will help us in the House." 'No apology' Cordova's cousin was diagnosed in his 20s, and had five brain surgeries to address his cancer. "He was left with horrendous and devastating consequences of that (first) surgery," Cordova said. "He lost the eyesight in one eye, he lost the part of his brain that controlled all of his hormonal functions, and he lost the part of his brain that also controlled his ability to adapt his body temperature." Five generations of Cordova's family tree include many cases of cancer. She herself survived thyroid cancer, and as a co-founder of the Tularosa Basin Downwinders Consortium, she's long advocated for expanding RECA. Cordova's kitchen counter is covered in the stories of family trees that mirror her own. For 18 years, she's been collecting health surveys from people who grew up in areas downwind of aboveground nuclear weapon tests, documenting a history of cancer and death for families from Tularosa, Alamogordo and beyond. Loretta Anderson, a patient advocate and co-founder of the Southwest Uranium Miners Coalition Post-71, works with over 1,000 former uranium miners and their families throughout the Laguna and Acoma pueblos. She knows 10 post-1971 uranium miners, those who would be compensated under a RECA expansion, who have died in the past 12 months. "They died with no compensation, no apology from the government," Anderson said. Despite the difficulty in getting RECA extended and expanded, Cordova has faith it will eventually pass through Congress. "This is not a partisan issue," Cordova said. "Exposure to radiation has affected the young, the old, the male, the female, the Black, the white, the Republican and Democrat alike."
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Harrisburg restaurants react to Food Allergy Safety Legislation
HARRISBURG, Pa. (WHTM) — Right now there is no legislation in Pennsylvania that requires menus to have food allergy disclaimers. A bill to change that already passed the House. Restaurants abc27 spoke with agree the changes it would make are needed. House Bill 77 would also require restaurants to display a poster for their employees and have food allergy safety training. Millworks menu items that contain nuts or gluten are labeled. Front of House Manager Freddy Arundel says more and more customers are coming in with food allergies, which already prompted the restaurant to take precautions. 'The staff is trained to alert the kitchen about the allergies,' Arundel says. 'It's also flagged in our system on every ticket, so everyone who sees what's going on anywhere in the process and it's prepared separately and taken to the guest separately as well. Sauce Boss owner Sheri Tolomeo says gluten would be the main concern at her restaurant and she wouldn't mind updating her menus to disclose that. 'We could educate the people on it and then people can feel more comfortable when they come in ordering things because they know exactly what they're getting,' Tolomeo says. 'We can mix and match and make something that accommodates someone with an allergy.' Close Thanks for signing up! Watch for us in your inbox. Subscribe Now More than 33 million Americans have food allergies. That includes over one million in Pennsylvania. Bill sponsors say restaurants and other food retail facilities are the source of nearly half of all food allergy deaths. In a press conference on Tuesday, Kathy Briden spoke about her son Matthew who had a peanut allergy and died at age 28 after an accidental exposure. 'With a practical law in place, individuals and families living with food allergy may be more willing to extend trust when dining out, allowing Pennsylvania restaurants reap the economic benefits,' says Sung Poblete, chief executive officer of FARE (Food Allergy Research & Education). 'Ultimately, it is on the patron to inform the staff, but when the staff doesn't know what's in the food and just how deadly some of these reactions can be, we think that's the whole premise of House Bill 77,' says Rep. Natalie Mihalek (R-Allegheny and Washington Counties). House Bill 77 passed with bipartisan support in the House. Sen. Judith Schwank said in the Tuesday press conference that she's working on getting the Agriculture and Rural Affairs committee she co-chairs to get it on their agenda. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
