India, a modern-day exemplar of democratic values, is standing at the threshold of an important reform ~ One Nation, One Election. As a nation that has set the benchmark for democratic processes, it becomes crucial that we reflect on how to improve the effectiveness, equity, and sustainability of our democratic systems. Elections are essential to a healthy democracy, but they should serve the country’s agenda of national growth, not hinder it. Simultaneous elections don’t just refer to a logistical change but a transformative shift that will unlock the full potential of Indian governance.

As we march toward a Viksit Bharat ~ a developed India ~ this change may serve as the impetus for streamlining our democracy to meet the aspirations of an upcoming global power. Democracies thrive on the active participation of their citizens and ability of their institutions to stay stable. However, regular elections in India are a continual source of distraction to both the people of India and the politicians. Currently, elections in India are staggered over several months, with some state or the other going to the polls at a given time. This puts the nation in a constant state of campaign mode, with political parties fixated on electoral strategies rather than governing. Democracy is not only about casting a ballot; it is also about governing well. This process is hampered by the ongoing election cycle, which draws focus away from implementing policies and toward winning elections. One of the most significant advantages of holding simultaneous elections is the financial savings it would generate.

Advertisement

Every time there is an election, whether it is a state or federal one, enormous resources are spent on staff, security, campaigning, and logistics. Even though the work at hand ~ electing representatives ~ is fundamentally the same, these expenses are constantly incurred under the current system. Elections for the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies can be held concurrently, allowing the Centre and the states to split the costs evenly and saving a significant amount of public funds.

This is particularly crucial for developing nations like India, where money saved from recurrent elections is better used to support urgent needs like infrastructure, healthcare, and education. The democratic principle demands that public funds should be efficiently used, and holding of simultaneous elections is a step in that direction. The fact that regular elections lead to uncertainty in the business climate is equally significant. Political shifts frequently result in uncertainty in policies and supply chain disruptions, which have an immediate impact on businesses and industries, especially those that depend on migrant labour or supply continuity.

Businesses are unable to make long term decisions because of a persistent worry of changing political winds, which stunts their ability to grow. A more stable political climate would result from synchronizing elections, allowing companies to concentrate on development and expansion rather than hedging their bets against prospective policy changes every few months. India’s economy would grow dramatically as a result of this stability, which would also allow companies to plan with assurance.

Moreover, the perpetual cycle of elections frequently makes it difficult to put important policies into action. Elections produce a political climate in which governments, both national and state, put off making critical decisions out of concern for public backlash. Vital welfare programmes often face delays or slowdowns even in the absence of the Model Code of Conduct, as political attention completely turns to election campaigning. Development initiatives therefore frequently stall, and the momentum required to propel reforms is lost. Simultaneous elections would lessen the likelihood of these interruptions, enabling the administration to stay focused on development and governance for the duration of its mandate.

This would result in much smoother implementation of policies and also a more consistent flow of public services to the citizens, thus aligning with the long-term goal of creating a Viksit Bharat. The burden that regular elections inflict on the security and administrative machinery is another important factor. Administrative staff, educators, and government workers are diverted from their primary duties to perform election-related tasks during election seasons. Offices are understaffed, schools are shuttered, and security personnel are taking time away from their principal responsibility of upholding peace and order. This impacts vital services like education in addition to causing inefficiencies in governance.

Simultaneous elections would allow the administrative set up to fun – ction more effectively by reducing the diversion of resources for election duties. Security forces, too, would be relieved of the constant election-related deployments, allowing them to focus on their primary role of maintaining internal security and public order. The efficiency gained from reducing such distractions would have a ripple effect on governance, ensuring that essential services continue uninterrupted. Simultaneous elections would also encourage voting, which is essential to any functional democracy.

Voter weariness develops when elections are spaced out over multiple time periods, which lowers turn – out in state-specific elections. On the other hand, simultaneous elections increase voter turnout because citizens understand the importance of voting for both state and federal legislatures at the same time. Since the public would be making a decision on a broad scale at one time, political parties would need to provide more thorough campaigns that address both local and national issues. Increased voter turnout results in more representative governance. This would foster a more robust democratic climate where the interests of voters take precedence over immediate political benefits. Simultaneous elections have sparked worries from some that local issues may take precedence over national ones, potentially marginalizing regional parties. This reasoning, nevertheless, falls apart when examined more closely.

Indian voters have demonstrated time and again that they are capable of telling state elections from national ones. Even in elections that are held close together, they frequently elect different parties to office at the state and federal levels. Regional parties would still have lots of chances to interact with their voters and bring up regional concerns. In fact, simultaneous elections would encourage national parties to concentrate more on local issues, fostering greater political competition and guaranteeing that local, regional, and national issues are sufficiently addressed. In reality, since voters would be making more thoughtful and well-informed decisions, this would strengthen India’s democracy.

Countries around the world, including Brazil, the Philippines, and Honduras, have adopted some form of simultaneous elections, demonstrating that this model is both practical and effective. These nations have seen the benefits of holding elections at multiple levels simultaneously, including reduced costs, increased voter turnout, and more efficient governance. India, with its vast electorate and complex political landscape, stands to gain even more from such a system. Once implemented, the logistical challenges, while real, would be far outweighed by the gains in governance, fiscal responsibility, and democratic participation.

Though there are difficulties with the One Nation, One Election plan, India has continuously shown itself to be a creative and adaptable democracy. There is an obvious need for reform. Small implementation problems shouldn’t be used as a justification for skipping execution if the reasoning is sound. Concurrent elections would simplify government, lessen the nation’s financial load, steady the business climate, and increase democratic engagement. Governments would be free to concentrate on accomplishing goals rather than constantly promoting for the next election.

In a nation as diverse and dynamic as India, this reform is not just desirable ~ it is necessary for the continued growth and development of the country. India can take a step toward becoming a fully developed country and a Viksit Bharat, where governance is effective, responsive, and focused on the needs of the people rather than the demads of the election calendar, by adopting this revolutionary idea.

(The writer is a Professor at XLRI and a leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party)