All you need to know about- One Nation One Election.

Democracy, as we all are aware of, is for the people, of the people and by the people. In a modern state like India, keeping up this people spirit has become a costly affair over the years. Since democracy involves electing a representative by voting, it is not rocket science to imagine the cost and time spent on conducting it, in a country where as many as 34 births are registered every minute. In 1952, for the first Lok Sabha elections, it cost around ₹10.45 crores, while the 2014 elections saw an upsurge of ₹3,870.3 crores (ECI data). A similar amount was spent by the Home Ministry, Indian Railways and other concerned agencies involved, to ensure that systems are properly in place. The 2009 Lok Sabha polls, axed ₹1,483 crores to the exchequer. While we wait for the 2019 poll expenditure data to hit us in the face, knowing for a fact that it is among the world’s most expensive polls; the Govt. in the majority has decided to stymie the current process of conducting democratic elections.

After one nation one religion, better known as ‘Hindu Rashtra’ the BJP is now the new nidus for ‘One Nation One Election.’ There is absolutely no doubt that the present form of elections compels the ECI to shell out a lot of money which in a way could be saved. Every election season comes with shuffling of officers, bureaucrats, men in uniform etc. to the hinterlands. Mind you, apart from the huge travelling expenses of soldiers, we also have booth management, logistical, advertisements and campaign expenses to name a few. Even the infrastructure usage is disturbed and the normalcy halts for a brief time period.

Now, we are at the threshold of should India hold simultaneous elections to the Parliament, all state Assemblies, and to the local bodies? This is the basic question underlying discussions on the Modi government’s ‘one nation, one election’ (ONOE) proposal. But what exactly is the government proposing, and what are the arguments for and against ONOE? Here’s a brief analysis for a wonk to understand the issue and the various opinions on the matter.

One nation, one election, or simultaneous elections, would mean that instead of having several elections happening across the country every year, elections will be held only once in five years – either in a single phase, or more practically, in multiple phases. For instance, if the government does choose to go the ONOE way, and all legal hurdles are cleared, voters in Uttar Pradesh will vote for the central government and the state government at the same time, perhaps in 2023.

Before diving into the binaries of ONOE, here is an important trivia: The 2019 elections will cost an egregious 50,000 crores! ($7 billion), according to the New Delhi based Centre for Media Studies. This, of course, includes expenditures of all major parties. It is imperative to know that it includes flower petal showerings, chopper rides, posters, paid rally attendees, online advertising, logistics and organisational expenses, party flags, masks, wrist bands, oceans of pamphlets and what not. Also, with this same amount of money India could help every state build an AIIMS like institute, or for instance if used in defence India could buy the S-400 missile defence system from Russia, quite literally on the spot! And still would have some money to buy some other weapons. Thus, ONOE is not bickering.

Another one: about $6.5 billion was spent during the U.S. presidential and congressional races in 2016, according to opensecrets.org, which tracks money in American politics.

---

Let’s first look at the bright side of ONOE.

1. The cost of conducting elections will come down since the personnel required to conduct elections will be brought down. Although ONOE would mean the Election Commission of India would need to buy a lot more EVMs to which the Law Commission of India estimated the cost of buying enough EVMs would be to the tune of Rs 4,500 crore which they implore that in the long run, this cost will even out.

2. It will aid elected governments and ruling parties focus on governance, instead of preparing for elections somewhere or the other in the country. This applies more to national parties than regional parties. For example, a giant party like the BJP or INC who has a presence in almost every state of India will now not have to focus on fighting assembly elections and devise strategies every other month. It is over in one shot. It also relieves their wallet which is presently loose strings pretty much all the time.

3. It will stop policy paralysis because of Model Code of Conduct being in place multiple times in the five-year tenure of the government, whether at the Centre or in the states.

Therefore, these are the top 3 pros of ONOE.

The Law Commission of India was asked to prepare a report last year on simultaneous elections, and their feasibility, by the government of India. The Commission submitted its report in August 2018, and said it was in favour of ONOE – however, it also stressed that simultaneous elections are not possible unless there are amendments to the Constitution, and to other laws. The Constitutional issues with ONOE are:

1. Articles 83 and 172 of the Constitution, which guarantees five years to every elected Lok Sabha and Assembly respectively, ‘unless sooner dissolved’ will have to be amended. 🤨

2. Articles 85(1) and 174(1) stipulate that the intervening period between the last session of the House of the People / State Legislative Assemblies and the first Session of the subsequent House / Assemblies shall not exceed six months. So if ONOE comes in – what happens if there is a hung Assembly/Parliament situation? What if a government falls due to a no-confidence motion? What if a representative dies one year into their tenure? 🤐

3. Article 356, which deals with the President’s rule, may need to be amended. Article 356 comes into force only if there is a failure of constitutional machinery in a state – so for President’s rule to be put in place for the sake of simultaneous elections is problematic. This is because for instance, if Kerela is going to polls in 2022 and the centre wants the elections to be conducted in 2023; will the opposition allow one extra year of the ruling party? 🤔

4. The Tenth Schedule of the Constitution – which is the anti-defection law – will have to be reconsidered if Assemblies and the Lok Sabha must ensure continuous governance for five years if the ruling party does not have a large mandate. 🙄

Quite a lot of edits to make in the holy book of India. Isn’t it? For this, the NDA also needs a two-thirds majority in the house -- which they have! 😅

Moving on, here are some criticisms of ONOE.

1. Simultaneous elections are against the federal structure of the Constitution. It forces the voter to think of national and state issues at the same plane and will take away the gains made by regional parties over the years and favour national parties, (argued by some regional parties).

2. Amending Articles 174 and 356 – which deals with ‘Provisions in case of failure of constitutional machinery in State’, or President’s rule – will alter the basic structure of the Constitution and will impinge on federalism.

A quick reminder: The current limitation on amendments comes from Kesavananda Bharati v. The State of Kerala, where the Supreme Court ruled that amendments of the constitution must respect the "basic structure" of the constitution, and certain fundamental features of the constitution cannot be altered by amendment.

3. Dilution of Tenth Schedule – the anti-defection law – will lead to horse trading. Remember Mr Modi’s remarks at Sreerampur pre-elections period that 40 MLAs of her party were in touch with him, the comments reflected to “horse-trading”.

Horse trading, in its literal sense, refers to the buying and selling of horses. But, in politics, it refers to, when political parties resort to unscrupulous ways to lure members from another party to put together the majority required to form a government. Sometimes the defectors are rewarded with plum ministerial berths, often with sumptuous monetary gains. ;)

4. ONOE is not feasible: if a central government that is made up of a coalition faces a situation where an ally pulls out, and the government falls, elections will have to be conducted in all state governments, too, within six months, even if there is no issue in those states. And vice-versa.

These few points make the ONOE theory complex and it seems a mirage in a variegated India.

MY OPINION:

I think, ONOE would definitely cut down costs for the ECI and exchequer, but it will cost the union of India a fair democracy. Think of it as this way, instead of spending 1,000 crores round the year heavyweight parties will put let’s say 800 crores once a year. Indians have a long history of sending wealthy people to parliament. If ONOE comes into being, even Ambanis and Adanis could win an election in a snap, (which they still are doing) despite being no experience or will to represent actual voices.  

If the question is, How much does an election cost?

Well, almost nothing...if you’re Donald Trump. Polarise people with populist slogans, make the press hate you, and you’ll be on your way to becoming the most powerful person. But Indian politics is different.

India’s budget allocated 2.62 billion rupees to the Election Commission this fiscal year, a new high figure in itself. What about candidates? A Scroll report states, “Officially, India has limits on election spending: Rs 50 lakh-70 lakh per Lok Sabha candidate, and Rs 20 lakh-28 lakh per assembly candidate, depending on the state. In practice, research suggests the reported expenditure of candidates “only represent a minuscule fraction of their real expenses—frequently less than 1/30th or 1/50th of the overall amount.”

ONOE, for sure as God appears to be impossible; but did you know about the demon demonetisation before 8 November 2016?

You can read the Law Commission of India’s report on the issue here.

Celebrate World Hug Day!