Partisan Signals, Procedural Opinions: Elite Cues and Public Support for Filibuster Reform

Debates over the U.S. Senate filibuster are a flash point in partisan conflict over legislative power, yet we know little about how elite cues shape public attitudes toward procedural rules. We test this question using a two-wave survey experiment embedded in the 2024 Cooperative Election Study, in which respondents were randomly assigned to receive a real statement supporting filibuster reform from President Biden, President Trump, or a control message. Respondents who received a co-partisan presidential cue were more supportive of weakening the filibuster. Receiving an out-party presidential cue reduced support, an effect driven by Democrats’ strong negative response to the Trump cue. Contrary to expectations, political knowledge of the filibuster did not moderate these effects. We also document a cross-wave decline in Democratic support for filibuster reform following the 2024 Republican election victory, a shift that occurred even among respondents in the control condition, while Republican support remained stable. Together, these findings demonstrate that public attitudes toward legislative procedures are shaped by both partisan elite messaging and the broader partisan stakes of institutional reform, with implications for how scholars model the political environment surrounding procedural change.

Recommended citation: Barron, N. T., Blum, R., Crespin, M., Finocchiaro, C., McLaughlin, P., Olson, P., Reeves, N., & Rhodes, J. Partisan Signals, Procedural Opinions: Elite Cues and Public Support for Filibuster Reform.