Cost Sensitivity, Partisan Cues, and Support for the Green New Deal

Abstract Opponents of climate policy proposals frequently ground their objections in terms of costs. However, it is unclear whether these objections are persuasive to voters considering whether to support such programs. Not only do people have difficulties in understanding large numbers, partisans in particular may place more weight on the originator of a given proposal – supporting it if their own party proposed it, and opposing it otherwise. We test these dynamics using a survey experiment that varied the costs associated with real-world climate policy proposals attributed to each of the two major U.S. political parties, compared to a control group where no cost was made salient. We find little evidence that citizens are systematically sensitive to program cost, and that partisans tend to prefer policies proposed by their own party. The results provide reason for skepticism that cost-based objections to climate spending programs are persuasive at scale, after accounting for partisan cue-taking.