One nation one election (ONE) is a proposal to hold simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha (House of the People) and all state legislative assemblies in India. The proposal has been around since the early days of Indian independence, but it has never been implemented.
There are several arguments in favor of ONE. First, it would save money and time. Currently, elections are held every 5 years for the Lok Sabha and every 3 to 5 years for state legislative assemblies. This means that elections are held every 2 to 3 years in India. ONE would reduce the frequency of elections, which would save money and time.
One Nation, One Election Benefits
- Saving money and time. Currently, elections are held every 5 years for the Lok Sabha and every 3 to 5 years for state legislative assemblies. This means that elections are held every 2 to 3 years in India. ONE would reduce the frequency of elections, which would save money and time.
- Reducing the burden on the Election Commission of India (ECI). The ECI is responsible for conducting elections in India. Currently, the ECI has to conduct elections for the Lok Sabha, all state legislative assemblies, and local bodies. ONE would reduce the workload of the ECI, which would allow it to focus on conducting elections more efficiently.
- Reducing the level of political instability in India. Currently, there is a lot of political instability in India. This is because elections are held every 2 to 3 years, which gives politicians a short window to achieve their goals. ONE would reduce the level of political instability by giving politicians a longer window to achieve their goals.
- Ensuring timely implementation of government policies. Currently, there is a lot of focus on winning elections, which can sometimes overshadow the focus on implementing government policies. ONE would help to ensure that government policies are implemented in a timely manner.
- Increased voter turnout. One study found that simultaneous elections could lead to an increase in voter turnout by up to 5%. This is because voters would be more likely to vote if they only had to vote once.
However, there are also some potential drawbacks to the ONE proposal. These include:
- Difficult to implement. ONE would require a constitutional amendment, which is a difficult process. It would also require the cooperation of all state governments, which is not always easy to get.
- Costly to implement. The ECI would still have to conduct elections, even if they were held simultaneously. In fact, ONE could actually cost more money, because it would require the ECI to deploy more resources to conduct elections in all states at the same time.
- Increased voter fatigue. Voters might get tired of voting every 2 to 3 years. This could lead to a decline in voter turnout, which would undermine the democratic process.
- Overshadowing of local issues. When elections are held simultaneously for all levels of government, local issues may be overshadowed by national issues. This could lead to a decline in voter interest in local elections.
Overall, the ONE proposal has both potential benefits and drawbacks. The decision of whether or not to implement ONE is a complex one, and there is no easy answer.
|Our Portal||click here|