The District
The Incumbent
The Scandal
The Challenger
The Analysts
How to Teach this Case

The District
This district is a liberal urban/suburban district. It is mainly blue-collar, with a significant minority of African-American and Latino voters. They reside mostly within the central city of Ogden. The urban part of the district also includes large numbers of pro-union factory workers who make automobiles; therefore, the auto industry has a big impact of this district. The suburban part of the district is small (about 25 percent of the district lives outside the city). these voters tend to vote Republican, although they are far from ideological (for the most part). Generally, this district has been very friendly to Democrats at both the national and local level.

The Incumbent - John Violet (Democrat)
Up until six months ago, the Republicans would have had no hopes of ever picking up this seat. Democrat John Violet was a three-term incumbent in a district in which Democrats outnumber Republicans 2-1. Violet has been popular with his constituents, as he was reelected with over 70% of the vote in November 2000. He is among the more liberal of Democrats in Congress, very much in favor of stricter environmental regulations (he was one of the leaders in opposing President Bush's plan to allow drilling for oil in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge). Violet is also a strong supporter of public education; he has made the public university in the district one of the state's top recipients of federal dollars. He also is a champion at bringing federal dollars to the district for such things as road construction.

The Scandal
In May, just after the filing deadline for the primary, Violet was arrested for drunk driving three blocks from his house. Police pulled Violet over after he was seen driving erratically. Violet was captured on police videotape threatening the officers by telling them, "I'm a <expletive deleted> Congressman! I'll get your <expletive deleted> badge!" Needless to say, it was a damaging event. This was compounded by the fact that it happened on a slow news day; this was a front-page story, and videotape of the incident was broadcast repeatedly on TV.

Violet apologized for his actions, pled guilty to driving while intoxicated, and was sentenced to two years of probation, 80 hours of community service, and had his driver's license suspended for ninety days. He voluntarily entered an alcohol abuse program and claims to be completely sober since the arrest. He has steadfastly refused to resign his seat, saying that "I have made a mistake and been dealt with by the courts. I do not believe that this one mistake makes me ineligible to continue giving the district the high-quality representation I have given for almost six years."

The Challenger - Richard Casper (Republican)
Since Violet appeared strong before the arrest, all strong Republicans in the district passed up the chance to challenge him. The Republican nomination went to Richard Casper, a small business owner. Casper is active in local Republican politics and sought the nomination when he realized nobody else would. "Nobody should run without opposition. That's not democracy," Casper told a local reporter on the day he filed. Casper, however, is young (34), has no political background, and little experience on the issues. He is, relatively speaking, a lightweight.

People in the district still note that Violet still possesses formidable advantages. He's on the right side of the issues as far as this district is concerned. He's smart and articulate, a champion of local interests, and widely perceived as more qualified than Casper. However, scandals sometimes cause incumbents to lose. While nobody but the staunchest Republicans are predicting and Casper win, even the staunchest Democrats are predicting that this is a race to be watched.

The Analysts
Political analyst Sam Balish describes the race as follows: Representative John Violet is being challenged here in a Democratic district. Violet has done a nice job representing the interests and ideology of this district during the first six years he has been in Congress. And, while he foolishly got himself embroiled in the drunken-driving incident, he has handled it as well as can be expected. In my view, for Casper to win one of two things must happen. First, more evidence must come forward showing Violet is unfit to serve in Congress. There's little likelihood of that. Second, Casper must convince many loyal Democratic voters that their Democratic representative exercised such poor judgment that he should be booted from office and replaced with a Republican. Unlikely to happen. Leans Democratic.

Democratic Party consultant Barry Simon offered this advice to the Violet campaign: As I see it, there's only one issue that's making this a race, and that's the unfortunate arrest. Without that, the ballgame is over. I think we must move, quickly, to neutralize this issue. Our man made a mistake. He admits it. The courts have adjudicated the matter. There's no 'pattern' of poor judgment or anything else like that. One mistake. Our candidate has repeatedly said that this one mistake does not disqualify him from continuing to do the job of representing his constituents. If John Violet can impress upon the people what a fine representative he has been, they will see he deserves their forgiveness and the chance to continue to represent their interests in Washington.

Republican Party consultant Barry Newman offered this advice to the Casper campaign: Before Violet's drunk driving arrest, this wasn't a race we were tracking at all. Now, we're looking at it a bit more, but still not expecting victory. Frankly, we wish this arrest had happened earlier to allow us time to mobilize our strongest potential challenger. Casper needs to demonstrate that he's more than a lucky guy who stumbled into a freak situation. The only chance he has in this election is to win the debate, big time. When he shows he's capable enough to be a congressman, then he becomes a really viable challenger.

When trying to win in a situation such as this one, things get awkward. You don't want to get into name-calling or other such things. The fact that Violet also entered rehab and is now doing well means we need to give him space to deal with what is in many ways a personal matter. But, doing what he did showed remarkably poor judgment. The only way we'll beat this incumbent is if we make the voters believe that someone showing judgment this poor should not hold this seat.

How to Teach this Case
This case presents a fairly typical setting - a seat that is on paper safe for one of the parties. Most districts are like this, which is why in any given year over 80% of congressional races are not really competitive. Now, due to unusual circumstances, one of the 80% has become competitive. Representative Violet probably could have served for a long time in this district, attracting little opposition. But the scandal may have caused some voters to reexamine Violet and decide anew whether he is right for this seat. Both campaigns will have the challenge of dealing with the drunk-driving arrest. Violet will have to minimize its effects on the campaign, while Casper will need to fan its flames for electoral gain, all the while being careful not to "cross the line" (such as by calling Violet a drunk).

Two additional issues present themselves in this case. First, there is the issue of quality challengers (see the Resources for Teachers section). The Republicans ran a poor challenger because Violet's strong chance of winning discouraged others from running. Now, they certainly wish they had a stronger challenger. With all the damage the drunk-driving arrest did to Violet, the Republicans will need an unexpectedly strong debate performance and campaign performance from Casper to have a chance.

Finally, this case presents an opportunity to discuss issues such as personal life and political office. A teacher might want to engage students in a discussion about whether a personal scandal should disqualify someone from office, especially when they deal with it as properly as Violet did. This could be compared with Bill Clinton's or Gary Condit's stonewalling in the Monica Lewinsky and Chandra Levy episodes, respectively. This kind of debate, which obviously has no correct answers, might be interesting to have in class.

See also "How to Teach with Case Studies"