Public Support for Cross-Issue Compromises in the U.S.

Abstract

Theoretically, cross-issue compromises can facilitate policy reforms, as multiple groups can win on an issue they prioritize. Under what conditions do Americans sup- port them? Prior research emphasizes one-dimensional compromises or abstract sup- port. We provide a theoretical framework to understand how support for cross-issue compromises differs from support from their components. We also generate hypotheses about the conditions when such compromises are especially likely, highlighting ideo- logical extremity, partisan asymmetries, and moral issues. To test them, we employ four surveys (N = 5,250) fielded by NORC (2023) and YouGov (2021—2025). Overall, cross-issue compromises win substantial public support, but less than expected based on their components’ popularity. Partisan asymmetries when respondents are asked about compromise abstractly decline or disappear when they face concrete trade-offs. Donors show less support for compromises, as do those who lose on an issue they deem important. There remain demand-side barriers to compromise among an influential segment