Political scandals can tarnish politicians’ reputations, damage the public’s trust in government, and lead to calls for reform. Whether stemming from a high-profile break-in at a party headquarters like Watergate or more personal behaviors like bribery or misleading campaign statements, political scandals can have long-lasting effects on the way people think about corruption in politics. Historical scandals have prompted legislative changes that enhance transparency and accountability in politics, while contemporary scandals have contributed to growing cynicism about politicians and the political process.

Despite the pervasiveness of scandal, the underlying causes remain unclear. Some scholars have linked these developments to harmful Supreme Court decisions that whittle down campaign finance regulations and the rise of scorched-earth politics where even flimsy accusations are used as political cudgels. Others have attributed the rise of scandal to growing partisanship that fosters a zero-sum mentality in politics and reduces the value of political discourse.

In this week’s episode of Politics in Question, we discuss the role that political polarization plays in the scandal-making process. Joining us are Charles Hunt and Jaclyn Kettler, professors of political science at Boise State University (BSU).

The study of scandal is different from the study of misbehavior in general because it centers on the political calculus that drives the decision to expose or not an elected official’s misdeeds. This question is at the heart of the new paper by Wioletta Dziuda and William Howell, both of UChicago’s Harris School of Public Policy, whose work casts new light on how polarization shapes the scandal-making process. They develop a model of two parties with one member who has information about the other’s behavior and can choose to share this information with voters or not.