Understanding the One Nation, One Election Bill A Transformational Reform or a Threat to Democracy?

Introduction

• The One Nation, One Election Bill has sparked an intense political debate in India. Proposed as a historic reform by the BJP, it aims to synchronize all elections Lok Sabha, state assemblies, and local bodies into a single cycle every five years. While the government claims this reform will save billions, boost efficiency, and ensure uninterrupted governance, the opposition argues it could undermine democracy and weaken regional voices.

What Is the One Nation, One Election Bill?

• Currently, India has multiple elections throughout the year. This means:

• Frequent pauses in governance due to the Model Code of Conduct (MCC), halting key projects and policies.
• Enormous costs, with the 2019 Lok Sabha elections alone costing ?60,000 crores.
• Disruption to essential services, as officials and resources are diverted for election duties.

The bill proposes aligning all elections into one synchronized cycle. For example, voters would cast two votes in a single election one for Lok Sabha and one for their state assembly.

Government’s Arguments in Favour

1. Efficiency and Savings: Synchronizing elections could save over ?4.5 lakh crores and reduce logistical burdens on administration and security forces.
2. Boosts Economic Growth: Research claims this policy could increase GDP by 1.5%, cut inflation, and attract more investments.
3. Focus on Governance: Fewer elections would reduce political distractions, allowing governments to concentrate on long-term development.

Challenges Raised by the Opposition

• Constitutional and Legal Hurdles: India's federal structure means states and the centre operate independently. Aligning their election cycles would require amending at least five key constitutional articles and convincing 50% of states an uphill task.
• Risk to Regional Voices: Synchronization might amplify national issues while side lining local concerns. Studies suggest voters often pick the same party for state and national elections, which could weaken regional parties.
• Loss of Accountability: Frequent elections act as checkpoints, holding governments accountable. A single cycle every five years might let underperforming governments evade midterm scrutiny.
• Short-Term Governance Risks: If a state government collapses midterm, the replacement would serve only a brief period, prioritizing survival over long-term reforms.

The Big Question: Reform or Risk?

• While the bill promises cost savings and efficiency, critics argue it could centralize power, dilute regional representation, and lead to governance focused on short-term gains. Moreover, reforming the Model Code of Conduct might address the same issues without overhauling the electoral system.

Why It Matters

• This debate is more than just political it’s about the future of India’s democracy. Should we prioritize efficiency and economic gains, or protect regional diversity and accountability? The answer requires careful consideration, not just political allegiance.

Thank You (Make sure follow Dhanraj Patil for more such content and subscribe " Zero To One")