One India: One Election

India has been put into a perennial election mode with each year consisting of the general elections or those of the state legislatures. This kind of an environment is not at all conducive for an economy like India with reforms being the need of the hour, not populism. The cost on the government for conducting the elections in a free and fair manner has been increasing manifold every passing general election. In the year 2009, the burden on the state exchequer was around ₹1400 crores while the cost for having the 2014 general elections was nearly ₹3500 crores, a staggering increase of almost 150%. History: The Vidhan Sabha elections in India were synchronised with the Lok Sabha elections since the beginning, but the general election scheduled in 1972 was held nearly one year ahead of schedule — in March 1971, by Indira Gandhi. This altered the way in which the elections were held. Policies with a pivoted agenda: The development of the country is brought to a halt every time there's an election with either the model code of conduct being into place or the politicians having the goal of appeasement (either regional or caste-based) in mind. The policies of the country are driven by timing – not that of the best time to suit the efficacy of the policy but the time when there's an election nearby. For example, the hastily executed demonetisation was implemented before the Uttar Pradesh polls. The polls, therefore, were considered as a 'referendum' on the policy enacted by the Prime Minister and not on the individual candidates contesting in each constituency. This kind of politics, keeping an 'idealist' in mind that puts forth policies for the betterment of India before elections, is dangerous as people tend to overlook the ones who will actually represent them. The GST, again a policy enacted by the central government, was 'put to test' in the Gujarat elections. Black Money: It is best known that each candidate tends to exceed the limit of money to be spent. Although India’s laws say individual candidates can spend only ₹70 lakh on their campaigns, this amount does not even cover the poster printing costs in important contests. The election commission does put forces in place to ensure there's no booth capturing or there are no instances of cash-for votes. But doing this multiple times doesn't make any financial sense either, especially when it can be done once every five years, holding all kinds of elections- from the panchayat to the LS at once. Those politicians who say people tend to vote for the same party all times if they're held at once are to be accused of condescension. Logistics:

Though logistics is acceptably a huge problem, we can echo what the PM recently said about unifying the state and central voter lists. This would bring down the scale of inconvenience and malpractice. The election commission, for the 2014 Lok Sabha elections justified its spending by saying it held programmes in rural villages on the importance of voting and that there were TV and newspaper ads which were put to sensitize the voters on the significant change their votes could cause.  Having the elections at once decreases the frequency of those ads and programmes from yearly to once in five years. It is, in the end, left for the informed voter to 'decide' and most importantly convey his/her decision to the powers that be. Making an informed choice does ensure that we are not manipulated by the system, instead we use it to put the country on the right path – the path of development.

- Siddharth Sampath