One Nation, One Election: A Historic Reform by the Modi Government

The One Nation, One Election proposal has been a long-standing vision of the Modi government aimed at synchronizing elections for the Lok Sabha, State Assemblies, and local bodies across India. On [December, 17^th , 2024], Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal introduced the Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024 in the Lok Sabha. The move reignited debates around its impact on federalism, governance, and democratic processes.

While the government calls it a necessary step to enhance administrative efficiency, opposition parties have criticized it as “anti-federal” and rushed. Let’s delve into the details, examining the rationale, challenges, and future of this transformative proposal.

What is One Nation, One Election?

The One Nation, One Election concept refers to holding simultaneous elections for:

• Lok Sabha (Parliament)
• State Legislative Assemblies
• Local bodies (Municipalities and Panchayats)

Historically, India conducted simultaneous elections from 1951–52 to 1967. However, political instability and premature dissolution of state governments led to staggered election cycles. Today, elections occur almost every year in different states, placing enormous logistical and financial strain on the government and Election Commission of India (ECI).

Why the Modi Government Supports This Reform

The Modi government argues that One Nation, One Election will:

1. Reduce the Financial Burden:
   Conducting frequent elections costs billions of rupees. A synchronized election cycle will save significant resources.

Election Costs in India

• Lok Sabha Elections: The 2019 General Elections cost the government and Election Commission approximately ₹60,000 crore, including security arrangements and administrative costs.
• State Elections: State elections cost significant amounts individually. For example, elections in large states like Uttar Pradesh or Maharashtra may cost upwards of ₹5,000–7,000 crore.
• Frequent Local Elections: Elections for local bodies add further costs to the public exchequer.

Potential Savings

• Election Commission Costs: Holding multiple elections increases expenses for polling booths, security forces, EVM deployment, and voter outreach. Combining elections could reduce these costs by 30–40%.
• Government Spending: Frequent implementation of the Model Code of Conduct delays developmental projects, costing the government revenue. Experts estimate savings of around ₹10,000–15,000 crore annually.
• Political Party Expenditure: Parties and candidates spend vast sums on campaigning during each election cycle. A single synchronized election would reduce their financial burden considerably.
• Estimates by NITI Aayog
• NITI Aayog’s 2018 report indicated that simultaneous elections could save up to ₹1 lakh crore over a five-year period. This figure includes both direct costs and indirect savings from uninterrupted governance and reduced policy paralysis.
• Enhance Governance:
• The Model Code of Conduct (MCC), enforced during elections, restricts governments from making policy decisions. Simultaneous elections will allow uninterrupted governance.
• Minimize Political Disruptions:
  Frequent elections lead to constant political campaigning, diverting attention from developmental work.
• Improve Voter Participation:
  Conducting elections at all levels simultaneously may boost voter turnout, streamlining the democratic process.

Opposition’s Concerns

While the government emphasizes the benefits, opposition parties have raised several challenges:

1. Threat to Federalism:
   Critics argue that simultaneous elections undermine India’s federal structure by centralizing power and diminishing state autonomy. States may lose flexibility to dissolve assemblies or call fresh elections based on local needs.
2. Logistical Challenges:
   Conducting elections nationwide for all tiers of government would require immense resources, personnel, and EVMs (Electronic Voting Machines).
3. Impact on Local Issues:
   Simultaneous elections may shift focus from state-specific issues to national narratives, sidelining local concerns.
4. Constitutional Barriers:
   Amendments to multiple constitutional articles (e.g., Articles 83, 85, 172, and 356) are necessary to implement this reform. Passing such amendments requires substantial political consensus.
5. Democratic Representation:
   Critics fear a scenario where opposition parties at the state level are overshadowed by dominant national parties, reducing political diversity.

The Numbers Game: Can the Bill Pass?

To amend the Constitution, the bill requires a two-thirds majority in both houses of Parliament and ratification by at least 50% of state legislatures.

• In the Lok Sabha, the NDA holds 292 seats out of 543. For a two-thirds majority (362 votes), they need support from regional and opposition parties.
• In the Rajya Sabha, where the NDA does not have a majority, the government will need to rely on neutral parties like BJD, YSRCP, BSP, and others.

The government is banking on political fragmentation within the INDI Alliance to ease its passage. For instance:

• NCP and other regional parties have shown willingness to discuss the bill in the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC).
• Uddhav Thackeray and Omar Abdullah have recently distanced themselves from Congress on various issues.

Additionally, provisions like “present and voting” during a joint parliamentary session could reduce the required majority if opposition members abstain.

Government’s Strategy and Amit Shah’s Push

Union Home Minister Amit Shah defended the bill in Parliament with a strong, confident speech. He highlighted that:

• The Constitution allows for necessary changes to strengthen democracy and unity.
• Simultaneous elections will eliminate policy paralysis caused by frequent election cycles.

Shah also assured that the government will consult stakeholders, including state governments, political parties, and constitutional experts, before final implementation.

The Road Ahead: What Happens Next?

1. Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC):
   The bill has been referred to a JPC for wider consultation and debate. This step aims to address opposition concerns and build consensus.
2. State Ratification:
   Once passed in Parliament, the bill will require approval from at least half of India’s state legislatures.
3. Pilot Implementation:
   The government may begin with pilot projects in states like Uttarakhand, where political consensus is stronger.
4. Elections Timeline:
   If successful, the reform could align all elections with the 2029 Lok Sabha elections, allowing adequate preparation time.

The introduction of the One Nation, One Election bill marks a historic and ambitious step toward electoral reform. While the Modi government has presented compelling arguments for its implementation, opposition concerns regarding federalism, logistical challenges, and constitutional barriers cannot be ignored.

The bill’s success hinges on political consensus, strategic alliances, and effective communication of its benefits. Whether it passes in the near future or faces prolonged deliberations, one thing is clear: this proposal has sparked a transformative debate on the future of India’s democratic process.