In recent years, North Carolina lawmakers have actively pursued legislation to eliminate the practice of Daylight Saving Time (DST), advocating for a permanent shift to Eastern Daylight Time (EDT). This initiative aims to address various concerns, including health implications, economic benefits, and the desire for consistent timekeeping throughout the year.
Background on Daylight Saving Time
Daylight Saving Time, first introduced during World War I, involves advancing clocks by one hour in the spring to extend evening daylight and reverting to standard time in the fall. While intended to conserve energy and provide longer daylight hours, the practice has faced criticism over its impact on health, safety, and daily routines.
North Carolina’s Legislative Efforts
North Carolina’s pursuit of permanent DST dates back to at least 2019. In April of that year, House Bill 350 was introduced, proposing that the state remain on DST year-round, contingent upon federal approval. The bill emphasized the potential health benefits, citing studies linking time changes to increased rates of heart attacks, car accidents, workplace injuries, and depression. Proponents argued that eliminating the biannual clock shifts would enhance quality of life by providing more daylight during evening hours.
The bill passed the House State and Local Government committee but did not advance further in the legislative process. However, the issue remained a topic of interest among North Carolina legislators. In March 2021, House Bill 307 was introduced, mirroring the previous proposal to adopt permanent DST. The bill highlighted the negative health effects associated with time changes and referenced studies suggesting that permanent DST could save lives by reducing traffic accidents and workplace injuries.
A bipartisan group of state House lawmakers, including Representatives Jason Saine, John Szoka, Jon Hardister, and David Willis, sponsored the bill. They argued that the current system of changing clocks twice a year is outdated and contributes to various health issues. The bill proposed that North Carolina would remain on DST permanently, provided that Congress passed legislation granting states the authority to make such changes.
National Context and Considerations
North Carolina’s efforts align with a broader national discourse on the efficacy and impact of DST. Several states, including South Carolina, Georgia, and Tennessee, have passed laws or resolutions seeking to move to year-round DST. At the federal level, the “Sunshine Protection Act” has been introduced multiple times, aiming to make DST permanent nationwide. However, as of March 2025, no such legislation has been enacted.
Health experts have weighed in on the debate, with organizations like the American Academy of Sleep Medicine advocating for permanent Standard Time over permanent DST. They argue that permanent DST could lead to decreased safety during morning commutes due to darker mornings, especially in northern regions. In cities like New York, Los Angeles, and Minneapolis, permanent DST would result in sunrise times occurring well after 8 a.m. during winter months, potentially affecting daily routines and safety.
Economic and Social Impacts
Beyond health and safety, the debate over DST has economic and social dimensions. Proponents of permanent DST argue that the additional evening daylight could boost consumer activities, particularly in retail and recreational sectors, by encouraging people to spend more time outdoors and engage in leisure activities after work. However, industries reliant on morning daylight, such as agriculture, express concerns that permanent DST would disrupt traditional work patterns and affect productivity.
Educational institutions also face challenges in this debate. Later sunrises under permanent DST could impact school start times and student well-being, as children would be commuting in darker conditions during the early morning hours. This consideration adds complexity to the discussions, as policymakers strive to balance the interests of various stakeholders.
Conclusion
The movement to end Daylight Saving Time in North Carolina reflects a growing sentiment that the biannual clock changes are more disruptive than beneficial. As the state legislature continues to consider bills like House Bill 307, it must weigh the health, safety, economic, and social implications of such a change. This decision will not only affect daily routines but also contribute to the ongoing national conversation about the relevance and impact of DST in modern society.
Disclaimer – Our editorial team has thoroughly fact-checked this article to ensure its accuracy and eliminate any potential misinformation. We are dedicated to upholding the highest standards of integrity in our content.