In continuation to my earlier blogs on the necessity of voting and floating suggestions on the electoral reforms required for a healthier democracy, I am further registering my school of thoughts in this blog in this regard.
In India, Elections have become a ritual. Invariably, the voter turn-out on election dates do not go beyond 65% unless something happens similar to what happened at Tirumangalam constituency where the bye-election was held recently. Considering rigging, hardly the actual figures of people turn out to vote would not be more than 60%. What happens to the balance 40% of the voters? Why do not they vote? I am sure the Election commission of India would have thrown some light on this. Perhaps, the political parties also, for whom every vote matters, might have done some ground-work on this.
I am not a statistician however; I throw my hat and come out with some figures which might be more or less similar to factual ones.
¨ Out of this 40%, 5% are attributed to people who are either on the move or who cannot move. This is the problem of accessibility. EC should work on improving the accessibility.
¨ Another 10% of voters are those people who are rich, for whom standing in a queue among others (to vote) is a waste of time. Irony is these people will have their say among the rulers as they fund the politicians irrespective of their party origins.
¨ The third is the category who takes the excuse of “none is qualified”. Still, section 49 O, provides an answer to this. All that one need to do is to exercise this option if they are genuine in citing this excuse. This category too, cannot exceed 10%.
¨ The fourth one is the category where people do not vote because they do not want to. This category forms the major chunk of the non-voter percentage.
Voting is our right and duty as well. Had we considered voting as our right, we would never stay away from voting unless the reasons are genuine. Hence, Let us take up the duty part. “What do I get if voted?” “What if I did not vote? What will I lose by not voting?” these are the questions that linger in almost all of their minds. Perhaps, we do not have answers for this. This does not mean that those who vote do not get such questions in their mind. Still, they do vote. Why? If we did this study, perhaps, we might get the solution too. This is termed as differential diagnosis in problem solving techniques.
It is the human tendency that one needs motivation to perform his duty. My take is that despite such question that rise in mind, there must a factor that motivates the voter to come out and vote. That factor may be caste, religion, party, money (given by the contestant), or his commitment to the voting right. Hence, there has to be a motivating factor for some one to come out and vote. It will be better if the factor is in the interest of the nation.
Let us consider voting is our duty. Can there be a duty that is as easy as this? Is the duty of the voter gets fulfilled as soon as he clicks the button against the candidate’s symbol? His next turn of performing the duty comes only after 5 years? What happens to his duty during these 5 years? Does he have a way to express his approval or denial to the proposals of the Government from time and again in these 5 years? Ironically, he remains silent all through these 5 years. A few of them might raise a voice through newspapers, magazines, blogs and very few of them participate in the rallies of some political parties (if paid). Other than this, as a voter, who has a duty towards democracy, what does a voter do or what else can a voter do? The voter neither has the responsibility nor the accountability however; he bears the brunt of any wrong decision taken by the Government. Irony is, such decisions are taken in voters’ name! This is why I said, Elections have become a ritual in India.
Had we maintained the relationship perpetual between the voter and the ruler, by means of communication, perhaps, refraining from voting might not happen. Whether we like it or not, voting is our duty. As said earlier, our duty does not end with voting alone. In our representative system of democracy, people’s voices are never heard but political party’s voice is heard. Indeed, it is difficult to listen to 1 billion voices and make a decision. Still, the communication needs improvement. As on date, only monologue prevails ie only politicians speak and we listen. It does not happen the other way. To make it a success, people should not stop themselves from providing valid suggestions. Trivial issues like water supply and electricity can be dealt at the level of ward councilor.
Cable TV is an excellent media of communication that can bridge the gap between the voters and representatives. Like beaming new films in the local channels, why can’t the voter and the representative set up a discussion forum on a fortnightly or a monthly basis that will be beamed? This provides opportunity to gage the wavelength of the voter and would persuade the representative to act accordingly. The representative can be asked to present his performance, the utilization of MPLAD funds on a monthly basis. Thus, accountability will be brought and an open appraisal can be done.
I hardly doubt whether a portion of our population see the LOKSABHA TV. Those who pursue political science also are not watching this channel. There was a time healthy debates used to happen in the Houses. Even the vociferous BJP is not contributing in the House they used to do years back! Such is the awareness and interest in current affairs among our people in India. The press media, unless it is sensational (like MPs fighting), has made it a point not to cover the Parliamentary proceedings. They are not fools to waste their columns that would not attract readership. Who are we to suggest them? After all, they are here to make money and it is your fault to consider them as a pillar of democracy!
Like we enjoy the freedom of this democracy, we should be ready to accept the responsibilities of the duty - The duty to vote. Making it compulsory might sound odd but unless enforced certain things do not happen. I have been telling that compulsory voting is a must. The EC has to facilitate this by listening to the potential problems of the genuine cases where one cannot vote. If one does not prefer to tax the non-voter, extend some fringe benefits to voters. This might work in our country.
Experts need to analyze and present the real-situation to people on the harm of not voting. For illustration, in Kashmir, there were twelve constituencies where voting turn out was less than 30%. Out of this 12, 8 seats were won by the party that got an opportunity to rule the state. Is it not ironical? In the number game, the essence of democracy is lost.
¨ We get the right Government if we vote
¨ If one does not vote, he loses the opportunity to place our country on the path of progress
¨ Voter might not lose anything instantly but the country would lose its position in the global arena if right policies are not set. In the process, the voter too loses!
Considering these, one should not refrain from voting unless the reason is genuine. Will these things happen? Only time will tell us!
