Context:

• The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill seeks to implement One Nation, One Election (ONOE) by synchronising elections to the Lok Sabha and all State Legislative Assemblies.
• This will be done through the insertion of Article 82A and amendments to Articles 83 and 172.
• The proposal, based on the recommendations of the High-Level Committee (HLC) chaired by former President Ram Nath Kovind, requires a two-thirds majority in Parliament and ratification by at least half of the States.
• Hence, there is the need to critically evaluate the government's rationale and highlight constitutional, political, and economic concerns.

Government's Rationale for ONOE: The HLC justifies simultaneous elections on four major grounds -

• Reduction in election expenditure.
• Minimising policy paralysis caused by the Model Code of Conduct (MCC).
• Lower administrative and security burden.
• Higher economic growth, citing research claiming that GDP growth is around 1.5 percentage points higher during simultaneous election cycles.

Questioning the Economic Growth Argument:

• Historical evidence contradicts the claim:
  • India's period of simultaneous elections (1952–1967) coincided with the "Hindu Rate of Growth" (~3.5% annually), characterised by licence raj, import substitution, and closed economy.
  • India's highest growth phase (2003–2011) occurred during staggered elections, with GDP growth of 8–9%.
• Methodological concerns:
  • The cited research may not adequately account for major growth drivers such as 1991 economic reforms, trade liberalisation, IT revolution, global capital inflows, and financial sector development.
  • Further, the reported growth appears partly driven by higher fiscal deficits, and increased government expenditure.
  • This raises the possibility of a political business cycle rather than sustainable structural growth.

Election Expenditure - Does ONOE Reduce Costs?

• Limited government spending: Election expenditure by the government constitutes less than 0.1% of the Union Budget, according to Election Commission of India (ECI) accounts.
• The real issue - Black money:
  • Candidates officially report spending only about 50% of the permissible expenditure limit. This suggests substantial unaccounted election financing.
  • The Centre for Media Studies (CMS) estimates that the 2024 Lok Sabha election involved over ₹1 lakh crore in expenditure, much of it believed to be unaccounted.
• Hence, ONOE merely concentrates election expenditure rather than reducing the role of black money or campaign financing.

MCC - Problem Shifted, Not Solved:

• Currently, different states remain under MCC for nearly four months annually due to staggered elections.
• Under ONOE, the MCC would apply simultaneously across the country, and developmental announcements would be suspended nationwide during one large election period.
• Thus, governance disruption is concentrated rather than eliminated, making the claim of ending "policy paralysis" questionable.

Constitutional and Democratic Concerns:

• Impact on parliamentary democracy:
  • The Kesavananda Bharati judgment recognised parliamentary democracy and free and fair elections as part of the Basic Structure.
  • Challenge: If a government loses its majority before the common election cycle, it cannot continue without democratic legitimacy, and frequent President's Rule would undermine federalism.
  • Constructive no-confidence motion: The HLC proposes adopting Germany's model, where a no-confidence motion must simultaneously elect an alternative government.
  • Critics argue this: Alters India's parliamentary tradition. Enables weak minority governments to remain in office.
• Fixed synchronisation requires altering assembly tenures:
  • Achieving the first synchronised cycle would require extending some Assemblies, while curtailing others.
  • However, Articles 83 and 172 limit legislative tenure to five years. Extension without elections violates the electorate's mandate. Premature dissolution shortens the tenure voters approved.
  • Hence, both options compromise democratic legitimacy.
• Threat to federalism and regional parties:
  • Research indicates a "wave effect" - Simultaneous elections encourage voters to support the same party at both national and state levels.
  • Potential consequences:
    • Electoral advantage for large national parties.
    • Weakening of regional parties.
    • Reduced attention to state-specific issues such as agrarian distress, coastal livelihoods, flood management, and regional development priorities.
  • This may dilute India's cooperative federal structure.

Ignoring Local Government Elections:

• The proposal excludes elections to the Panchayats, and the Urban Local Bodies.
• These are constitutionally protected under the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments.
• Key concerns:
  • Local body elections remain under State Election Commissions, not the ECI.
  • Municipal corporations such as Mumbai, Pune, and Bengaluru manage budgets exceeding those of several states.
  • Separate local elections would continue to involve administrative deployment, security arrangements, and governance disruptions.
• Therefore, many projected efficiency gains remain unrealised.

Reforms Needed Instead of ONOE:

• India's electoral challenges lie elsewhere and can be addressed without major constitutional amendments.
• Reforms needed:
  • Transparent disclosure of political donations.
  • Strict enforcement of expenditure limits.
  • Disqualification of criminally tainted candidates.
  • Strengthening the independence and autonomy of the Election Commission of India.
  • Measures to curb black money, vote-buying, and misuse of state machinery.

Conclusion:

• The proposed One Nation, One Election framework primarily reorganises India's electoral calendar without addressing the structural weaknesses of the electoral system.
• The anticipated gains remain uncertain, while the proposal raises significant concerns.
• Hence, strengthening electoral integrity through targeted reforms would be a more effective and constitutionally sound approach than undertaking a far-reaching constitutional restructuring.