More than just about anything other than Dolly Parton, Americans are singularly united on one thing and one thing only: a hatred of daylight saving time.
So when we asked you what you thought of the House passing the Sunshine Protection Act in July with a 308-117 vote, we were unsurprised to see a united front against the scourge of changing clocks.
Now, as we face yet another fall back by one hour on Nov. 1, after Congress adjourned without passing the act that would have ended the nation's twice-yearly time change, your ire is still steadfast, but the solutions you're lobbying for are still as divided.
Don't forget to set those clocks back, read a small sample of your responses below and look out for more opportunities to share your thoughts
with us during that extra hour of light or darkness by visiting usatoday.com/forum or dropping us a note at forum@usatoday.com.
'Sunshine Protection Act'? The sun doesn't need saving, folks
The majority of Americans say they are morning people, so why are senators courting the 12% who want more light in the evenings? You can bet that such an irrational act has money and power behind it, somewhere. The phrase "Sunshine Protection Act" is a political trick phrase to make us think that sunlight is somehow in danger, but that lucky old sun just keeps rolling along. We can't save it, nor can we increase it by some clever sleight of hand.
Most people I know just want our leaders to settle on one time style or the other and stop putting us through the twice-a-year trauma. But history clearly shows us that our leaders are not capable of doing this. It's like the weather: They dearly love to talk about it, but they can't fix it.
— Daniel Schantz, Missouri
Congress can solve more than one problem
I live in a state that observes daylight saving time. The clock change leaves me completely out of sync and exhausted until I return to a standard schedule. I naturally wake with the sun.
When I have to get up before daylight, I don’t feel fully alert, and that fog can follow me throughout the day. I rely more heavily on coffee, which often makes the cycle worse instead of better. My husband experiences time physically, too. He can look at the position of the sun and intuitively understand where he is in the day. Daylight saving time breaks that natural relationship between the clock and the sky, and he hates it.
When I was raising young children, the disruption was even more obvious. They didn’t understand why dinner, bedtime and wake-up suddenly shifted. Getting them up before daylight was difficult, and they were noticeably grumpier and less cooperative when they weren’t rested. That behavioral fallout made the transition exhausting for the entire household. For my family, this isn’t a minor inconvenience. It disrupts sleep, alertness, routines and the natural cues we use to move through the day. I’d gladly stop changing the clocks, but I’d choose permanent standard time.
We should stop changing the clocks, but we should adopt permanent standard time, not permanent daylight saving time. A clock is a measuring tool, and the sun is the reference. People invented clocks, but they didn’t invent the solar day. Daylight saving time doesn’t create additional daylight. It relabels morning light as evening light and moves civil time one hour further from the natural cycle the clock was designed to describe. Wanting more light after work is understandable, but that’s a scheduling preference, not a reason to redefine the shared standard for everyone.
If a recipe needs more sugar, we change the recipe. We don’t relabel the measuring cup.
Congress routinely handles many issues at once. The clock change affects households, schools, workplaces and transportation, so it’s a legitimate public policy issue. Addressing it doesn’t prevent lawmakers from working on more urgent national concerns. What Congress should avoid is confusing “end the clock changes” with “make daylight saving time permanent.” Those aren’t the same decision.
Personal preferences belong in schedules. The clock should remain the reliable shared reference from which those decisions are made. Congress should stabilize the standard, then continue doing the rest of its job.
— Abigail Wright, Iowa
It's artificial and unhealthy
I’m off balance all summer, and none of us enjoy changing clocks, much less disrupting our biorhythms. It’s artificial and unhealthy. It was never meant to be permanent. Having darker winter mornings would be morbid.
Congress should restore normal, sun-aligned standard time all year.
— Laurie Ayers, South Carolina
You can't make everybody happy, but most will be
I have five small kids, and time changes completely derail our family for weeks every year. It is horrible, and I fully support permanent daylight saving time. Frankly, I’m not passionate about which permanent time is chosen; I do prefer daylight saving to standard, but it’s not a hill I would die on. I just want to stop changing my clocks.
For the love of my sanity, please make this a focus! One group of people will be unhappy no matter which permanent time is chosen, but it feels like 100% of people are unhappy with the clock changing every year. I have literally never cared more about an issue.
— Jaclyn Kivelin, New York
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Please, pick a time and let me stop changing my clocks | Your Turn
