Roadmap for Answer Writing
1. Introduction
- Context: Introduce the concept of “simultaneous elections” or “One Nation, One Election,” a proposal that has gained attention for its potential to address issues of cost and time efficiency in the electoral process.
- Thesis Statement: While simultaneous elections could reduce election costs and time, they might also present significant risks in terms of weakening government accountability to the public.
2. Benefits of Simultaneous Elections (Reducing Costs and Time)
- Cost Savings for Election Commission:
- Simultaneous elections would reduce the number of elections, leading to significant cost savings for the Election Commission due to the pooling of resources and reduced logistics.
- Fact: In 2019, the general elections cost approximately ₹60,000 crore, a significant rise from earlier elections. Conducting fewer elections would substantially reduce these costs.
- Lower Expenditure for Political Parties:
- Political parties would spend less on campaigning, which could reduce the impact of money power in elections and make campaigns more issue-focused.
- Example: Reduction in campaigning expenses would lead to less reliance on electoral funding, making elections more equitable.
- Economic Benefits:
- The frequent disruptions caused by elections, such as in government work and economic activities, would be minimized with fewer elections, leading to better governance and enhanced productivity.
- Longer Periods of Governance:
- With fewer elections, the government would have more time to focus on policy implementation, which could result in more efficient governance and long-term planning.
- Better Coordination:
- The alignment of national and state elections could lead to better coordination between the central and state governments for more effective policy-making and national development goals.
3. Risks: Weakening Government Accountability
- Reduced Focus on Local Issues:
- Simultaneous elections may overshadow regional and local concerns, with national issues becoming the primary focus. This could dilute the importance of issues specific to states or localities.
- Example: In states like Tamil Nadu and Punjab, local issues might be overshadowed by national concerns, limiting regional political discourse.
- Fewer Opportunities for Voter Assessment:
- Holding elections less frequently could result in reduced opportunities for voters to assess and hold the government accountable for its performance.
- Implication: Voter dissatisfaction may not be expressed regularly, leading to reduced electoral pressure on governments to perform better.
- Potential Impact on Democratic Principles:
- Regular elections ensure that citizens have periodic opportunities to voice their grievances and influence government actions. Simultaneous elections may undermine this continuous engagement.
- Example: Reduced elections can erode the habit of frequent public assessment of governance and policy implementation.
- Marginalization of Regional Parties:
- National parties with more resources could dominate simultaneous elections, sidelining regional parties that focus on local issues.
- Fact: In states like West Bengal or Andhra Pradesh, regional parties might struggle to compete with national parties in the same electoral cycle.
- Overburdening the Election Commission:
- Managing simultaneous elections for both state and national legislatures could place a strain on the Election Commission, leading to potential delays and administrative challenges.
- Implication: Overburdening the Election Commission might diminish the effectiveness of the electoral process and reduce its capacity for ensuring accountability in governance.
4. Conclusion
- Summary: While simultaneous elections offer substantial benefits in terms of cost and time reduction, they carry significant risks in terms of diminishing government accountability and weakening local political engagement.
- Balanced Approach: Suggest that further reforms or pilot tests could be conducted to examine ways to mitigate the risks and maximize the benefits, ensuring that the proposal, if implemented, does not undermine the democratic fabric of India.
Key Facts to Support the Answer
- 2019 General Elections Costs: ₹60,000 crore spent in 2019 elections by over 610 political parties, highlighting the high financial burden of frequent elections.
- Impact on Regional Representation: Smaller or regional parties might be marginalized during simultaneous elections, as national parties with more resources could dominate.
- Local vs. National Focus: States like Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Punjab, where local issues are paramount, may find their concerns sidelined during national election cycles.
- Cost Savings Potential: The reduction in election-related expenditure for the Election Commission and political parties would be significant.
- Past Precedents: Elections were held simultaneously from 1951-1967 but were discontinued due to political instability, which presents both advantages and challenges in the current context.
Model Answer
Introduction
The proposal for simultaneous elections, or “One nation, one election,” has recently sparked renewed discussions in India, with the formation of a high-level committee to assess its feasibility. While simultaneous elections could reduce election expenses and time, there are concerns about their potential impact on government accountability.
Simultaneous Elections: Benefits of Reduced Time and Cost:
Conducting simultaneous elections would minimize the frequency of elections, leading to significant cost savings for the Election Commission due to pooled resources and reduced logistics.
Political parties would spend less on campaigning and mobilization, potentially reducing the role of money in politics and promoting a fairer electoral process.
Frequent elections often disrupt economic activities, particularly in terms of government and public sector resources. Fewer elections would ensure smoother governance and policy implementation.
With fewer elections, governments would have more time for long-term policy planning and execution, improving national development coordination.
Risks: Weakened Government Accountability
Simultaneous elections could overshadow state-specific issues and lead to the dominance of national concerns, weakening the focus on local governance and regional needs.
Holding elections less frequently could reduce the opportunities for voters to assess and hold governments accountable for their performance, affecting the dynamic of public feedback and responsiveness.
Reduced frequency of elections may prevent citizens from expressing their views regularly, weakening the core of democratic processes and public participation.
National parties with more resources could gain an unfair advantage, eroding the influence of regional parties and potentially leading to a two-party system.
Organizing simultaneous elections across India would overburden the Election Commission, raising concerns about its capacity and ultimately reducing the executive’s accountability to the people.
Conclusion
Simultaneous elections, while offering cost and time benefits, may risk undermining government accountability. Balancing efficiency with democratic integrity is crucial, and the Ram Nath Kovind High-Level Committee’s examination of the feasibility must address these concerns comprehensively.