Elections in USA…….shall India take a clue

Recently USA, a big, diverse and multiethnic democracy, has elected a new president, or in fact re-elected a former one. Voters have exercised their powers and have put the best person to their conscience to lead the country and the government as the president, with a clear mandate. That is the essence of a democracy. Few months back, India, another big, diverse and multiethnic democracy has done the same. Here too, voters exercised their powers and put the best person to their conscience to lead the country, but as the prime minster of a coalition government. In both big countries, elections were fully fair and democratic, and yet completely different and in contrasting democratic systems.

Comparison: US and Indian Electoral Systems

USA has a two-party presidential form of governance and India a multi-party parliamentary system. When examining the electoral systems of the United States and India, significant contrasts become evident, particularly in their implications for governance and political discourse. The USA two-party presidential system simplifies the electoral process, allowing for a more streamlined decision-making pathway. Voters typically focus on broader ideological differences between the two parties, leading to a more cohesive political environment. In contrast, India's electoral framework is a multi-party parliamentary system that accommodates a vast array of political parties representing the nation’s diverse ethnic and regional interests. The presence of numerous parties often results in coalition governments, which can complicate governance. It also nurtures factionalism and often defections on minor issue, generating more pollical chaos and instability.

The Indian Electoral System: Complexity and Challenges

The Indian electoral calendar is densely populated, as elections occur every five years at the national level, yet state and local elections can happen at staggered intervals throughout this period. This continuous cycle of elections not only demands significant resources but also poses considerable challenges regarding the management of these processes. Political parties and candidates are often required to allocate time, money, and manpower towards campaigning, which leads to unnecessary financial strains and resource depletion.

Additionally different regions may have varying levels of political engagement, governance issues, and local problems that influence election outcomes. The constant electoral activity also lead to a fragmented political environment, where leadership transitions occur frequently, potentially hampering long-term policy implementation and political stability.

Often, smaller political parties have backing of their cast and communities, which likes to take the advantage of the social and financial system, legally or illegally. There have been instances, where such parties had the backing of criminal gangs or mafia, mutually benefitting each other, while creating a great disorder for government system and law and order. Their importance grows, when mainstream parties fall short of majority and must rely on the support of smaller or regional parties for coalition. Social security along with economy and growth of the country take a hit in such scenarios.

Switching to a two-party presidential form of governance would automatically resolve many of the issues and bring political and social clarity to the country, still holding on to democratic system and values.

The Case for 'One Nation, One Election' in India

The frequent electoral cycles in India, characterized by staggered parliamentary and state assembly elections, have led to various challenges, including increased financial strain on the exchequer, disruptions in governance, and an overextended electoral apparatus. The concept of 'One Nation, One Election' proposes a singular event for holding both parliamentary and state assembly elections, aiming to streamline the electoral process and enhance the efficiency of governance.

By consolidating elections, several notable advantages may emerge. First and foremost, adopting a unified election schedule could significantly reduce the costs associated with conducting separate polls. Running parallel elections can result in savings on manpower, security, and logistics. These funds, potentially amounting to billions of rupees, could be redirected to more pressing public needs such as healthcare, infrastructure, and education.

Moreover, a single electoral event can foster political stability. With reduced frequency of elections, governments can focus on long-term policymaking rather than being preoccupied with imminent elections

Time has come that India and its public look into the flaws of political system and correct it before it is too late. Two two-party presidential form of governance and one nation one election can give more stability to the government and its policies and reduce financial and resource strain from the system.

Also published at: https://rahul-pandey.in/elections-in-usa-and-india/

Kommentar:

Please write your comments by clicking on the link in red.

Klicken Sie einfach auf den bereitgestellten Link, um Ihre Meinung einzubringen. - Hier Klicken