What’s behind Modi govt’s push for ‘One Nation, One Election’ and why it has rattled INDIA

Information and Broadcasting Minister Anurag Thakur has ruled out the possibility of early elections but opposition politicians cite many reasons why they think PM Modi is preparing to spring a surprise.

PM Narendra Modi | Reuters file photo

If the announcements about a special session of Parliament and a committee on ‘One Nation, One Election’ were meant to psych out the opposition, the purpose was achieved, not wholly or in full measure, but very substantially (with apologies to Nehru). It left the opposition alliance, INDIA, huddled in Mumbai on Friday, spooked. A hurriedly constituted coordination committee was one of the visible fallouts, but it unsettled them more than they would admit publicly. What’s Prime Minister Modi up to? It’s the question INDIA leaders have been asking since then.

Not Rahul Gandhi, of course. He is flying out of the country as G20 leaders descend in New Delhi this week. He would rather project himself as a Vishwaguru of a different kind—interacting with lawmakers in Brussels and students in Paris before moving to Oslo to address Indians there. Sam Pitroda must get credit for this clever way out to justify his foreign jaunts.

What’s the special session’s agenda?

Rahul might not seem bothered about proposed simultaneous polls or special Parliament session agenda, but his colleagues in the Congress lack his courage and conviction, so to say. Let me share my conversation with a Congress MP to give you an idea about how much the Bharatiya Janata Party can psych out its rivals. I told him frankly that I had no idea whatsoever about the agenda of the Parliament session. Even parliamentary affairs minister Pralhad Joshi seemed to be clueless. “When the agenda of the special session is finalised in two-three, three-four days, we will definitely discuss with you,” Joshi told reporters on Friday.

The parliamentary affairs minister couldn’t have been more candid. The session was convened first, and the agenda was to be decided later.

That is of little solace to opposition leaders. “It could be anything – women’s reservation bill, Uniform Civil Code, anything, for all I know,” I said, pleading ignorance. How can the BJP go ahead with the UCC when even its allies in the Northeast, the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) and even Jagan Mohan Reddy’s Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party (YSRCP) have such strong reservations?

“When did this government wait for a Parliament session or a political consensus? They can simply bring ordinances,” the Congress MP countered. “No, but we are talking about Constitutional amendments! Besides, how would a party that has winnability as its sole criterion suddenly find so many women candidates? It can’t even give tickets to wives and daughters of leaders, given its anti-dynastic stance. But, maybe, they have already done the groundwork,” I said, virtually contradicting myself but trying to sound logical to hedge my ignorance about the government’s plan.

Well, I didn’t have to feel embarrassed about my lack of knowledge about the agenda because even the parliamentary affairs minister was unaware. “You know what… they are advancing the Lok Sabha election. Take it from me. One Nation, One Election is a jumla, but he is using it to set the tone for advancing polls,” the Congress MP said decisively before he hung up.

Is Modi preparing for early polls?

He is among many people in both ruling and opposition circles who seem to be convinced that Modi is preparing for early polls. Even Information and Broadcasting Minister Anurag Thakur’s clarification that there are no plans for early elections has failed to put a lid on speculation. There are convenient explanations. BJP is on the back foot in the next round of Assembly elections. It has lost steam in Telangana and Chhattisgarh. And in Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, the party high command’s priorities are different – to fix Shivraj Singh Chouhan and Vasundhara Raje and deny them another term in office. These are the only two leaders among Modi’s CM contemporaries who still command a mass base.

Other BJP CMs are those whose unique selling point is loyalty to Modi or Home Minister Amit Shah. In this scenario, advancing the Lok Sabha poll to schedule it with Assembly elections in November is seen as a plausible move to give a fillip to the BJP with Modi as the face. Besides, the doddering Manohar Lal Khattar-led government in Haryana and the three-legged Maharashtra government, both of which still have a year to go, might also benefit if Modi becomes the face in the simultaneous polls. To top it all, going by those who see early Lok Sabha polls, all these moves would be projected as Modi’s grand, noble attempt to save money from elections to spend on the poor.

Many other reasons have been cited in support of this theory. The monsoon has been below normal, with August being the driest since 1901, and if the El Nino effect continues, the government will face the spectre of high food inflation in the months running up to the 2024 Lok Sabha election. Early polls would be safer, the political class argues. As for me, the point I find the strongest in favour of their argument, though not convincingly, is that Modi has avoided a cabinet reshuffle despite many allies wanting it. It has been two months since G Kishan Reddy’s appointment as Telangana BJP chief. But he still remains the Minister for Culture, Tourism and Development of the Northeastern Region. The PM hasn’t sought Reddy’s resignation yet. Nor has he shown any inclination to spruce up his team and give it a new look ahead of the Lok Sabha elections.

The above arguments seem to suggest a lot of advantages if Modi seeks a renewed mandate in November-December. But there is a flip side to it. It’s not just about how the Atal Bihari Vajpayee-led government paid for its over-confidence in 2004, when it advanced the Lok Sabha election. Modi is, of course, not Vajpayee. But before we discuss why early polls don’t suit Modi, let’s take a look at the One Nation, One Election concept he is aggressively pursuing now.

Pitfalls of One Nation, One Election

What’s the government or the ruling party’s or its spin masters’ arguments in its favour? Primarily, three. First, that it will save a lot of money. Second, frequent enforcements of the Model Code of Conduct will hamper development works. Third, simultaneous polls will ensure our rulers are not in permanent election mode.

Let’s come to the first point first. In a 2017 discussion paper, Analysis of Simultaneous Elections: The “What”, “Why” and “How”, NITI Ayog’s Bibek Debroy and Kishor Desai pegged the cost of election in 2009 at Rs 1,115 crore and in 2014 at Rs 3,870 crore.

The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Law and Justice, in a 2015 report, quoted the Election Commission of India as saying that the cost of simultaneous elections would be Rs 4,500 crore. This seemed to suggest a difference of barely Rs 800 crore in costs in simultaneous and staggered elections.

In a tweet on Sunday, Leader of the Opposition in Rajya Sabha, Mallikarjun Kharge, said that the Election Commission incurred a cost of Rs 5,500 crore in conducting all elections between 2014 and 2019 (including the last Lok Sabha election).

“It’s only a fraction of the government’s budget expenditure, makes the cost saving logic like pennywise, pound foolish,” wrote the Congress president. For a 3.75 trillion-dollar economy, the world’s largest democracy saving a thousand crores or so in democratic elections in five years is a pittance. Now, factor in the election commission’s submission in 2015 that the cost of procuring additional electronic voting machines (EVMs) and paper-trail machines for holding simultaneous polls would amount to Rs 9,300 crore. It’s not a one-time expenditure. An EVM’s life is 15 years only.

So, an average additional cost of Rs 3,000 crore per simultaneous election. How much money does India save through simultaneous elections, then? Very huge, Kiren Rijiju said in Parliament last December. He didn’t have the exact figures. In an interview with IANS in 2018, then-chief election commissioner OP Rawat conceded that whether simultaneous elections cut costs would need a systematic study.

Just to make it clear, we are talking about taxpayers’ money here—the cost incurred by the Centre in conducting Lok Sabha elections and by states in Assembly elections. If there are simultaneous elections, they will pay 50:50. So, when it comes to taxpayers’ money, simultaneous elections may end up saving a minuscule amount, if at all.

What we read about gigantic amounts being spent on elections is largely on account of the expenses borne by political parties and candidates. As per a report by the Centre for Media Studies, a New Delhi-based research organisation, estimated poll expenditure in 2019 was Rs 55,000-60,000 crore—up from Rs 30,000 crore in 2014—of which political parties and candidates spent Rs 44,000 crore. Of the estimated expenditures in 2014, the BJP’s share was 40-45 per cent as against the Congress’ 30-32 per cent. In 2019, the BJP’s share went up to 45-55 per cent as against the Congress’ 15-20 per cent.

As the CMS report suggested, the BJP has reasons to fret over expenses. But these astounding figures need to be authenticated. The Election Commission has told the Supreme Court that it doesn’t endorse the CMS report. That’s another story, though.

Tackling challenges

So, yes, political parties, especially the ruling ones, end up spending thousands of crores on elections. It’s a matter of concern, obviously, but there is another side to this. Where do they get the money from? Corporate and business houses, anonymous donors and, as the common perception goes, black money. One may argue that many of those donors are also taxpayers. But, to be politically incorrect, why not let them spend that money on elections? After all, that money is routed back into the economy, whether it’s spent on organising rallies, ‘buying’ politicians, influencers or voters, or selling pakoras at rally venues.

From helicopter companies to hoteliers and even those making or erecting hoardings and banners—everybody gets a share. It may sound like a cynical, unethical idea, but come to think of it, will political parties and politicians stop taking those donations if they have to spend less on elections? I won’t take a guess.

Coming to the second point about the MCC interfering in governance, there is a simple solution. Reduce the MCC period, or the Election Commission can set up a mechanism to vet and allow the governments to carry on with their developmental schemes and announcements without prejudice to the election process.

The election commission doesn’t have to delay announcing poll dates because the PM has to go and announce new developmental projects in those states. Keep governance out of MCC. Governments announce all sops before the MCC comes in place, anyway.

As for the third argument about our government getting time to focus on development works if there are no elections, who has stopped them? If the PM has to focus on electioneering all the time – even for Assembly and municipal elections – it’s the compulsion of the ruling party. Ideally, why should the PM be spearheading all poll campaigns, berating the opposition’s CMs and governments when he needs to befriend and coopt them for larger national interests?

The biggest drawback of simultaneous polls is that when many are discussing the merits and demerits of the right to recall our MLAs, MPs and higher-ups when they don’t deliver, simultaneous elections will reduce voters to go back 50 years to the days of Gulzar’s Aandhi (1975), when voters would welcome politicians with songs like salaam kijiye aali janaab aaye hain/yeh paanch saalon ka dene jawaab aaye hain….”

Under the existing system, if, say, people were unhappy with the demonetisation decision of 2016, the central government was forced to respond with alacrity because five states would be going to polls in the next four-five months – including important ones like Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Punjab.

If those affected by the 2017 Goods and Services Tax (GST) weren’t happy, the government had to go out of the way to address their concerns and grievances because Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh would be going to polls a few months later. But once we have a system in place where the governments at the Centre and in states are secure for five years, forget about accountability.

Lessons from Vajpayee’s 2004 experiment

One doesn’t know if Modi is as confident of his government’s popularity as Vajpayee was when he went for early elections. Vajpayee’s individual popularity was much bigger than his party’s, just like Modi’s. He thought he had a better ally in the AIADMK in Tamil Nadu. He decided to gable with Chandrababu Naidu in Andhra Pradesh despite the latter’s unpopularity. The alliance partners let Vajpayee down. There were many other factors, of course. A day before he cast his vote, Vajpayee knew he was going down, as his aide Shiv Kumar disclosed years later.

A shining India is what BJP leaders talk about today. The opposition is in disarray and has no narrative like in 2004. Will Modi fall into this trap? If he goes for early elections, it would reflect insecurities. It would seem like all his grandstanding about simultaneous polls is about saving his party in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Maharashtra and Haryana. Just because things are likely to get difficult because of under-par monsoon, he should want to get over with the election, choosing to deal with farmers’ or consumers’ distress after securing power again. Or is he worried about the opposition consolidation? In any case, he would emerge as an insecure leader – which the BJP can’t afford. Modi’s public persona is all about strength and decisiveness – someone who leads from the front during challenging times for people. Would the BJP reduce Modi to someone looking for manipulative tactics to stay in power? That would be political hara-kiri.

As for simultaneous polls, there will be questions once public debate starts. We have seen the deliberations and reports of the parliamentary standing committee, the NITI Ayog, and the Election Commission all favouring it. One doesn’t even need to discuss how the BJP will ensure the passage of constitutional amendments and ratification by half of the states, given that regional parties would be wary of this – in the current scenario, at least. Going by the recommendations of all bodies mentioned above, Assembly tenures will have to be curtailed or extended. Going by the Constitution, the terms can be extended only in case of a national emergency.

How would the government get around it? The BJP leads or is part of the government in a dozen states, including many in the Northeast. Would the party be able to persuade its chief ministers to curtail their tenures? And one is not even talking about states ruled by non-BJP states. To show that he is serious about simultaneous elections as a means to spend more on eradicating poverty, he would need the moral high ground.

So, what if the Congress and other opposition parties don’t want it and would rather cling to power? The BJP would show the way and get all its governments to resign and go for simultaneous polls. That would be the moral high ground the opposition would find very difficult to counter. But can Modi get his CMs like Yogi Adityanath and Himanta Biswa Sarma to go for snap polls for the larger One Nation, One Election objective? Your guess is as good as mine.

Ensuring continuity

One of the common suggestions heard from the law commission and the parliamentary standing committee to ensure continuity for five years is to ensure that when there is a no-confidence motion against a government, there also has to be a confidence motion in favour of a government to be headed by a named future PM. Voting should take place for the two motions together, and the first motion shouldn’t be carried without the passage of the second motion.

The opposition may be weak, but it can still project these proposed solutions as a move that’s meant to ensure that even if the BJP doesn’t have a full majority in future and has 230-240 seats in the Lok Sabha, the PM can’t be replaced. Hypothetically, even if the BJP falls short of a majority, it can form a government with support from friendly parties like, say, the YSRCP or the Biju Janata Dal, but if they want to pull out at any point in time, they can’t bring the government down because the motley crowd of opposition leaders with conflicting ambitions can’t have a consensus over an alternate PM candidate.

Given the state of the opposition in India today, that consensus won’t be there, of course. So, is the Modi-led government feeling insecure about the mandate it may get in 2024? These are the narratives the opposition may build as the debate on simultaneous elections continues. Modi can’t afford to let it build, though. He can’t afford to let an impression go that because things are getting difficult for the BJP in some states and because times are difficult due to a bad monsoon in the run-up to the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, he is looking for options to continue in office.

The ‘One Nation, One Election’ push lends credence to that impression. People love Modi because he delivers in times of adversity, be it Covid-19 or terror attacks on the country. A hint of frailty, insecurity or impression of manipulation to stay in power would discredit the Modi people have so much trust in. And he knows it better than anyone. And that’s why I tend to believe in Anurag Thakur’s assertion that PM Modi would like to serve till the last day of his term, as he told India Today.

I can’t, however, say the same about the political class that’s convinced that PM Modi would spring another surprise on them.

DK Singh is Political Editor at ThePrint. Views are personal.

(Edited by Zoya Bhatti)