I have not voted, what is the solution?

Discussion in 'Defence & Strategic Issues' started by johnee, Nov 24, 2009.

  1. johnee

    johnee Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,474
    Likes Received:
    467
    Yesterday, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation(GHMC) elections were held in Hyderabad. We had a holiday, there was much electioneering. This election has been taken very seriously by both the ruling party, Congress and the opposition party, TDP(Telugu Desam Party). The Chief Minister, K. Roshaih challenged that if Congress gets one seat less than TDP, then he will resign.

    So, the politics is hot, the issues are relevant. But still I have not voted. I did not find any candidate feilded by any party worthy of my vote. I was least interested in who wins the elections, because I knew, it would have no impact on my life in any positive manner. I dont think I am alone in this regard. Many educated, young voters share my view. This is reflected in the low voter turnout in the election. But this is not limited to this one election, this is a norm for most elections. Which leads to low voter turnouts. This is regularly termed by politicians and media as voter apathy, they flay the voters for not performing their duty of voting and then whining/complaing later. They sermonise us for not participating in democracy. We ask them:
    who should we vote? The local goon who has turned into a politician.
    why should we vote? Just to lend credence to this system?

    Isnt it better to pretend that we are having holiday and forget everything else?

    This thinking pattern of voters was well reflected recently in Mumbai in both National and Assembly elections. Mumbai was witness to 26/11 attack by Pakistani terror outfits last year, november. The media speculated high percentage of voter turnout, but voter turnout was not very encouraging. Not just that, the ruling party won both the elections, inspite of no action on 26/11 perpetrators. Who should be blame for this situation? The voters, who are forced to choose the 'least evil'? or do we require electoral reforms?

    Recently, during national elections, L.K.Advani, Prime Ministerial candiate of opposition party, BJP, talked about making voting compulsory to rectify low voter turnout. After all, voter turnout is key to success of democracy. But, if voting were made to be compulsory, then voters need to be given greater choices. Political parties cannot be allowed to armtwist the voters into choosing only the candidtates chosen by parties. Instead, the parties should be forced to choose the candidates likely to be favoured by the voters.
    This requires the voters to be given the power to reject all the voters fielded by the political parties.

    Here are some electoral reforms suggestions:


    * Abolish the first-past-the-post system: This has been amongst the most widely discussed electoral reforms in India. Multi-cornered contests have become a norm in India rather than an exception due to the increase in the number of smaller and regional parties. There have been cases in the state assembly elections where a candidate has been declared winner with the victory margin of less than 100 votes. Apart from this anomaly, in most cases, a candidate wins the election by securing just 30-35 per cent of the total number of votes polled. Hence he or she cannot be deemed to be a choice of majority of the electorate. To overcome this limitation, the first-past-the-post system should be replaced with a two-stage electoral process. In this, a second round of election will be held if none of the candidates in the fray is able to get 50 per cent of the total number of votes polled in the first round. The two candidates who have obtained the maximum number of votes in the first round will fight in the second round. Whoever between the two gets more than 51 per cent of the total votes polled in the second round is declared the winner.


    * Simultaneous elections for Union and state legislatures: Currently 3-4 states in India go for elections every year. This undermines the working of the union government as the regime in power cannot take tough decisions due to the fear of a backlash in the next round of assembly election. Hence simultaneous elections will not only ensure that governments at the centre and the states carry out their responsibilities in a smooth manner but also curtail unnecessary election expenditure. The arrangement of simultaneous elections can be extended to the elections for the municipal corporations and other Panchayati Raj institutions.

    * Fixed tenure of elected legislative bodies with no-confidence motion followed by a confidence motion: This is another move that will curtail the unnecessary election expenditure and at the same time ensure stable governments at the centre and in the states. In case none of the parties or coalition is able to form a government on its own, the members of the house should together elect an executive head among themselves and form a cabinet that has representation from members of all political parties on the basis of the number of seats they have secured in the elections.

    * Decrease number of registered parties: This move is necessary because the smaller parties are far more vulnerable to “ideological shifts” and in this era of fractured mandates, hold the bigger parties to ransom for their narrow political gains. The election commission should be given powers to de-recognise smaller political parties on the basis of their performance. Another move to achieve this goal would be to increase the minimum number of primary members that are needed to form a political party.

    * Increase the amount of security deposit: This move is necessary to put a check on the number of non-serious candidates contesting union and state assembly elections. Such a move has been taken in the past and has shown desired results. However in recent times, the number of candidates fighting elections has shown an increasing trend and hence there is a need to review the amount of security deposit.

    * Not allowing candidates to contest from more than one constituency in an election: This is necessary to curtail the unnecessary expenditure that election commission has to make when a candidate contests election from more than one constituency and wins from all the constituencies he has contested from. The bye-election that is necessitated by the candidate choosing one seat and vacating others seats he has contested from will no longer be needed.

    * Use of common electoral rolls in the union and state elections: This move will put a check on the cases of people finding their names missing in the electoral rolls. This happens because different lists are prepared by the Election Commission of India for general elections and the state election commissions for the elections of the state assemblies and local bodies. The effort and expenditure that is involved in making two lists for similar purpose will be greatly reduced.

    * Making false declarations in election affidavits an offence: This is necessary to ensure transparency about the profile of candidates contesting elections, many of whom have criminal cases going on against them on charges of heinous offence like kidnapping and murder. Anyone giving false information in the affidavits should be debarred from contesting elections for a minimum duration of five years.

    * Allowing negative/neutral voting: This will allow a voter to express his dissent by rejecting all the candidates contesting in his constituency if he finds none or them suitable to be elected. Currently a large number of people do not go to the polling booth because of their disenchantment with the candidates put up by the political parties. This is reflected in the falling poll percentages. Democracy in India will be strengthened if people participate in large numbers in the electoral process and have a choice to reject all the candidates instead of being forced to select one who they think is less bad than the others in the fray.

    * Ban on publication of exit/opinion polls results till voting is over for all phases: To ensure free and fair elections in India, the election commission holds them in different phases so that the available security staff is effectively deployed. Publishing the result of opinion poll on the earlier phases will have an impact on the voting pattern in the subsequent phases. Similarly, the opinion polls that are conducted before the election also influences the voting pattern. Hence there is a need to put a ban on the publication of the results of the exit/opinion polls conducted by various media agencies till all the phases of elections are over.
     
  2.  
  3. ppgj

    ppgj Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    156
    great suggestions johnee. insightful post/thread. wish EC takes note of you.:goodstuff:
     
  4. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,290
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Great work Johnee. My thoughts as below

    It will increase the election expense. Though it will give a better mandate, it can be disputed as the best system. I might have voted for a candidate that came third and therefore doesnt qualify for the run off. The two guys who made it are not of my liking and i dont vote. There maybe others like me. Then what? the winner will not be the one with a clear mandate.

    Problem is that there is lack of stability. A government can fall anytime. So we cannot have simultaneous elections. I know you have talked about fixed tenure term in your next point.
    Its not a workable option. We dont have political unity that we can have an all party executive. Besides it will be cheating peoples mandate.

    Bang on. For me the best way is the two party system. I am a great believer of that system. Has a lot of benefit.

    Will not work. Only the well healed are in politics where there is no shortage of funds.

    Agree

    Agree

    Agree

    Though it will give a good indication of peoples mood, its not going to make a lot of difference. Infact, we will have a winner who has got hardly any votes as a huge majority might chose this option. This will keep repeating as there is a lot of voter apathy in India. They think all the political parties are corrupt and not worth their vote. There will be no end to this.

    Exit polls are already banned till after polling in all phases. Opinion polls hardly matter. If they had, then the BJP would have formed the government in 2004.
     
  5. Emperor

    Emperor Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Messages:
    99
    Likes Received:
    0
    Simple solution is to eliminate all those silly bully fantasy parties.
    And only two parties needs to be in contest.

    these days we are getting as many new parties proportional to the number of votes.

    And I would like to add a Negative Vote concept.
    If you dont like to vote for any of the candidates contesting, they you can vote against all the candidates.

    A positive fair vote gives you the eligibility to vote only for a particular candidate of you choice, while the negative voting can be given to every candidate contesting in the election.

    For example: there were 5 candidates contesting and if you 1, then you can apply you fair vote.
    If you dont like any of them, you can put your negative voting to every one.If you dont like 3 and having neutral opinion of other 2, you can end up just putting 3 negative votes.
    But you can not take advantage of applying both negative and positive votes at the same time.(only one choice is to be considered)
     
  6. icecoolben

    icecoolben Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    Messages:
    472
    Likes Received:
    4
    From the topic 'I have not voted, what is the solution?', i thought it was a provision by RTI or something like that to check if the vote had been casted by forgery. How many similar people like youth, women or working class had not voted so and so, the impact the vote would have had on the election result etc.

    Anyway this is a genuine concern as well, in the short term these reforms could be implemented
    1. banning candidate from contesting from more than one constituency
    2. Banning the candidate from contesting in any election for 5 years, if he had lost his deposit
    3. A post poll feedback from houses who had not voted the previous election when listing takes place for the next one, this should be analysed by the independent election body
    4. Negative vote on a single candidate just like positive one, in case strong discontent with the personality along social, criminal, backgrounds
    5. The no-vote option
    6. Increasing the base support a party must have to contest as a party and banning it in case all its members lost deposit

    By ideology there are only two, rightist and leftist. But linguistic, ethnic, communal and religious identity have taken roots lately especially after 1990. But, taking cues from the previous election, we can see a process of consolidation. The democracy has grown confident neglecting people like lalu who played the communal card to their benefit. Only when people feel threatened, they turn inward. As India and Indians grow more confident of themselves, they would emerge shedding religious, cultural, ethnic and communal lines to forge themselves along national interests.

    In a democracy, this process may be slow but a sure one. As long as the centre leads a left-centre or right-centre policy balancing, regional and national issues, our democracy would definitely grow comprehensive. Until this time arrives, regional parties will hold a leverage on the national parties. I'm still confident India can get there as a nation free of hunger, a land of oppurtunity and a nation where individual freedom and human rights are respected as well as protected by law & executive system.
     

Share This Page