HRES-1055-119
Motion to Discharge Committee filed by Mr. Steube. Petition No: 119-20. (<a href="https://clerk.house.gov/DischargePetition/2026042920">Discharge petition</a> text with signatures.)
Sponsored by W. Steube (R-FL)
What it does
This resolution would set the procedural rules for the House of Representatives to consider H.R. 7378, a bill that would permanently adjust American timekeeping by amending the Calder Act. The resolution would waive all points of order against the bill, prohibit any amendments, allow one hour of debate split equally between the majority and minority, and permit one motion to recommit. It would also waive a Senate rule (clause 1(c) of rule XIX) for this bill's consideration.
Who benefits
Members of the House majority who want to bring H.R. 7378 to a floor vote quickly, bypassing the normal committee process. Advocates of permanent time standardization who have sought this change for years. Businesses that operate across time zones and prefer a stable, year-round time standard. The bill's sponsor, Rep. Steube, who filed a discharge petition to force the bill out of committee.
Who is hurt
Members of Congress — particularly in the minority — who would prefer to offer amendments or have more debate time on the underlying time-change bill. The Committee on Energy and Commerce, which loses its normal gatekeeping role over the underlying legislation. Members who support the underlying bill but want to modify specific provisions, as no amendments would be permitted.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the underlying bill — making daylight saving time permanent — has broad bipartisan public support, with polls consistently showing majorities of Americans favor ending the twice-yearly clock change. They contend that the normal committee process has stalled popular legislation, and that a discharge petition and closed rule are legitimate procedural tools to ensure the full House can vote on a measure that enjoys wide support but has been bottled up in committee.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that bypassing committee review and prohibiting all amendments removes the deliberative process that allows members to improve legislation and represent their constituents' specific concerns. They contend that a closed rule on a bill with significant national implications — affecting every American's daily schedule, public health, school start times, and commerce — denies the House the opportunity to address regional differences or unintended consequences that committee hearings would normally surface.