One Nation - One Election in Bharat

Advocating the implementation of the "One Nation, One Election" system in Bharat is a complex task, as it involves considering various aspects of this proposed electoral reform. While the idea of holding simultaneous elections for both the Lok Sabha (the lower house of Bharat's parliament) and state legislative assemblies has garnered attention and support from some quarters, it also faces significant challenges and concerns that need careful consideration.

The concept of "One Nation, One Election" envisions a single electoral cycle where elections for the Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies occur simultaneously, potentially reducing the frequency of elections and the associated financial burdens on the nation. This idea has been advocated for several reasons, including cost-saving, administrative efficiency, and the promotion of a stable and continuous governance agenda.

However, for Bharat it is not a new concept, in the past immediately after getting independence and After the Constitution was adopted in 1950, polls to the Lok Sabha and all state assemblies were held simultaneously every five years between 1951 and 1967. Bharat voted simultaneously for the Centre and states in 1952, 1957, 1962 and 1967.

So, those who are talking about challenges must see the things happening in the past when things were not what we have today. 

One of the primary arguments in favor of "One Nation, One Election" is the potential cost savings it can offer. Bharat conducts elections at various levels—Lok Sabha elections, state assembly elections, and local government elections. These elections involve enormous expenditures on security, logistics, campaign financing, and administrative arrangements. Holding multiple elections in a year or across several years strains the financial resources of the government and political parties alike. By consolidating these elections into a single cycle, it is argued that significant financial resources could be saved, which could then be redirected towards more pressing national priorities such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure development.

To comprehend the financial implications of this proposal, it is essential to analyze the colossal costs involved in conducting elections in Bharat. The expenses include printing ballot papers, deploying security forces, transportation and logistics, setting up polling stations, voter awareness campaigns, and various other election-related activities. By holding elections for the Lok Sabha and state assemblies simultaneously, a substantial portion of these costs, such as security deployment and logistics, could be shared, leading to a more efficient allocation of resources. Additionally, the reduction in the number of election campaigns within a year could potentially lower campaign-related expenditures, making the political process more cost-effective.

Moreover, the current practice of staggered elections creates a constant state of electioneering and political polarization in the country. Parties and politicians are often in perpetual campaign mode, diverting their attention and resources away from governance and policy-making. This continuous election cycle can hinder the effective implementation of policies and reforms. By adopting "One Nation, One Election," the nation can potentially free itself from this cycle of perpetual campaigning, allowing elected representatives to focus on their core responsibilities of governance, legislating, and addressing the needs of the people.

Another advantage of "One Nation, One Election" is the potential for improved governance and policy continuity. Frequent elections often lead to policy discontinuity as incoming governments may reverse or alter the policies of their predecessors. This can result in a lack of long-term planning and the inability to execute comprehensive policy agendas. Simultaneous elections can provide more stability in governance, as elected representatives, both at the national and state levels, can serve their terms without the constant threat of early dissolution.

Additionally, the current system of staggered elections can sometimes lead to disruptions in governance when the ruling party in a state calls for early elections, diverting attention from important matters to political campaigns. By synchronizing elections, such disruptions could be minimized, allowing governments to focus on their responsibilities without undue political interference.

While these potential benefits of "One Nation, One Election" are compelling, it is essential to acknowledge the various challenges and concerns associated with its implementation. One of the primary challenges is the need for constitutional amendments. The Bharatiyan Constitution provides for staggered elections to the Lok Sabha and state assemblies to ensure the federal nature of the country's democracy. Altering this arrangement would require careful consideration of federalism and the representation of states in the nation's governance.

Additionally, logistical challenges cannot be underestimated. Organizing simultaneous elections across the vast and diverse Bharatn landscape is a complex task. Ensuring the efficient deployment of security forces, managing polling stations, and conducting voter awareness campaigns on such a massive scale would require meticulous planning and coordination.

Another concern is the potential impact on regional parties. Simultaneous elections could favor national parties over regional ones, as voters may be more likely to align their choices at the national and state levels when elections are held concurrently. This could affect the political landscape by diminishing the influence of regional parties, which often play a crucial role in representing the specific interests and concerns of their states.

Furthermore, the success of "One Nation, One Election" depends on electoral reforms that address issues like campaign finance, political transparency, and the role of money in politics. Without these reforms, the proposed system may not achieve its intended goals of reducing the overall cost of elections and promoting cleaner politics.

Main Hurdles in implementation: 

Political Willpower of the Opposition: Parties including the Congress, Samajwadi Party, Trinamool Congress, NCP, RJD, AAP, and alliance members of I.N.D.I.A. are not aligned with the concept. They hold differing opinions, but what is more significant is the issue of their willpower, which is causing them to be indifferent to the idea.

Setback to Regional Parties: The "One Nation, One Election" concept might pose some challenges to regional parties, as they would need to consolidate their strategies to please local voters. One major concern is that they may lag behind in terms of campaigns compared to the considerable influence of national parties in their marketing and public relations efforts.

Impeachment will harm itself: Many regional parties are concerned about the alleged impeachment of a specific caste, religion, or region, as they fear that holding the same elections will diminish their influence. They worry about not only losing their traditional voters but also facing challenges from national parties, particularly the Bharatiya Janata Party. This party is likely to appeal to and sway minority and OBC voters in their direction. The parties that heavily favor Muslims will face significant threats and believe that appeasing Muslims will determine their political fate.

In my view, advocating for "One Nation, One Election" in Bharat is a multifaceted endeavor that requires a balanced assessment of its potential benefits and challenges. While the idea of cost-saving, administrative efficiency, and policy continuity is attractive, it must be approached cautiously, considering the complexities of Bharat's federal structure, logistical requirements, and the need for broader electoral reforms.

A comprehensive and inclusive dialogue involving all stakeholders, including political parties, constitutional experts, and civil society, is necessary to evaluate the feasibility and desirability of this electoral reform. Ultimately, any decision to implement "One Nation, One Election" should prioritize the strengthening of Bharat's democracy, the protection of federalism, and the improvement of governance for the benefit of its citizens.

If the government machinery possesses such coordination and can logistically manage the enormous task of "One Nation, One Election," then it would be the best option. This is because it would save millions of dollars that the Government of Bharat currently invests in various elections and the continuous state of readiness for these elections. The money saved could be used for the welfare of states and to propel the country further along the path of development. 

The Country should always come first, and as citizens, we should prioritize its well-being

(Writen by Baalwant Singh Raana)