The demand for simultaneous elections for states assemblies and the parliament has grown louder in recent times.
But the initiative is inherently flawed and could spell doom for our current stable political framework, which has withstood adversities.
What are the stated arguments in favour of simultaneous elections?
Simultaneous elections will help in removing frequent electoral distractions that nudge policy makers towards populism.
Cost saving measures is another ground on which simultaneous elections are being advanced as the net logistical expense for elections comes down.
Political stability is also being forwarded as key reason on why we should embrace simultaneous elections.
The argument is that such stability will help in reducing the fatigue of electioneering and aid in providing a stable 5 years of governance.
Implicit in this, is the assumption is that continuous and spread out elections across states are barriers for business environment and economic growth.
Flaws - Track record of synchronised elections (1951-67) paints a very different picture as India’s growth had accelerated only in the later decades.
At the national level too, the late 1990s saw tremendous political churning and instability – but economic growth seemed largely on track nevertheless.
What are the divergent views on the political implications?
Hawks - Some argue that simultaneous elections to the national parliament and state assemblies will provide an advantage to the national parties.
The logic is that pan Indian parties are better off due to something like “Economics of Scale” – where bigger firms manage to produce cheaper goods.
The non-electoral gains of an electoral victory in Parliament are also infinitely more than at the state level, which would be a serious consideration for voters.
Supporters – Although there is no clear evidence, some proponents of simultaneous elections too agree that national parties will be at an advantage.
In their worldview, the rise of national parties (as against regional parties) is necessarily for better coordinating developmental policies.
Thus, they portray that advantage for national parties is inherently good for the country as policies will freely percolate across the nation.
An unstated assumption that goes along with such thinking is that national parties have better governance capabilities that regionally restricted ones.
Nuanced Analysis - Empirical evidences of the performance of various state governments (of both national and regional parties) need to be studied.
Data since Independence clearly shows that growth and fiscal performance of regional party governments have been better than national parties.
Many innovative programmes like - food security and employment guarantee were first conceived and implemented by different state governments.
In no little terms, the diversity in policy has contributed to development – which is not possible without the existence of strong regional parties.
Hence, simultaneous polls will have major implications for party politics, and federalism, and hence is a key ingredient of constitution’s basic structure.
What are the constitutional implications?
The Spread - Dr. Ambedkar had noted in the constitutional debates that there will be a spread in elections across states over time.
This, he said was desirable as he perceived that a spread out election cycle was a key mechanism for ensuring accountability – in addition to other checks.
Hence, our parliamentary setup has been clearly intended to prioritise responsible and accountable governance than stable governance.
Federal Polity - “Separate state and central citizenship” was avoided due to possible fissiparous tendencies of the early years.
But our constitution is considerably federal and provides for a clear power separation between centre and states, thereby providing autonomy to states.
It is politically risky to tamper this structure, which has ensured peace and managed to hold extremely diverse cultural groups together.
The proposal for simultaneous polls cuts at the root of this grand design of the Constitution based on dual polity – which hence needs to be given up.
