The dust on ONOE, one election has not settled yet. And it won’t, if you ask me, for a very long time. At its core, the proposal is straightforward: to conduct elections for the Lok Sabha, State Legislative Assemblies, and local bodies simultaneously within a fixed span of time, thereby reducing frequent election cycles. The idea, however, is far from novel. Following independence, general elections and elections for state legislative assemblies ran concurrently for three years, i.e., 1951-52 to '57, '62, and '67. However, this trend got disrupted in 1972. Since then, India has never returned to simultaneous elections.
Proponents argue that synchronized elections could substantially reduce expenditure for both the governments, improve voter turnout, and minimize developmental disruptions caused by the repeated enforcement of the MCC. While the idea appears promising, the practical challenges loom large. Critics raise concerns about regional representation, accountability, and the balance of power between the Union and the States.
Before getting into the merits and concerns, we must confront a few things about our system's capacity: Some Stats: 1. According to the Centre for Media Studies (CMS), the 2024 Lok Sabha elections cost an estimated ₹1 lakh crore, with the average cost per vote at nearly ₹1,400. 2. The Election Commission of India deployed approximately 1.7 million EVMs and 1.35 million VVPAT units during the 2019 Lok Sabha elections.
3. The Election Commission of India requires a 3x (300%) increase in operational hardware to run simultaneous booths.
4. Studies suggest a 77% probability of voters choosing the same party in both Union and State elections when held simultaneously.
RATIONALE 1. Cost Efficient Simultaneous elections can significantly reduce repeated spending on security deployment, election logistics, and government staff. According to the Law Commission of India, simultaneous elections could result in an immediate 40% reduction in direct administrative and logistical costs.
2. Minimizing Disruptions India is almost always in "election mode" somewhere, and every election brings the Model Code of Conduct into force, freezing new schemes and big decisions until voting ends. Simultaneous elections would limit this disruption to just one period instead of many. 3. Better Governance Frequent elections often push governments into a continuous campaign mode, encouraging short-term electoral considerations over long-term policymaking. Simultaneous elections give governments a stable, fixed term to work with. This stability allows for better policy uniformity and smoother implementation.
4. Administrative Efficiency Elections use up a huge amount of administrative manpower and resources. Simultaneous polls would replace this endless cycle with fewer, well-planned elections. This frees up staff and funds, making administration more efficient and focused.
5. Voter Fatigue Frequent elections not only lead to voter fatigue but also repeatedly disrupt the daily lives of citizens through campaign activities, security arrangements, and administrative diversion. Simultaneous elections could boost voter participation and lead to more informed decisions. 6. Curbing Horse Trading Fixed-interval elections make it harder for representatives to switch parties or form alliances for personal gain. With no election around the corner to exploit, the scope for such deals shrinks. This adds to existing anti-defection laws.
CHALLENGES 1. Handling Mid-Term Elections One of the biggest challenges is handling a mid-term state government collapse without disrupting the synchronized cycle. The bill proposes that if a government falls mid-term, either a new one is formed from the existing legislature, or fresh elections are held, but either way, it only serves out the remaining period of the original cycle.
States may resist having their tenure cut short, and knowing their term could end early, may govern passively. Shorter terms can also push governments toward quick-fix populism (freebies, subsidies) over long-term fiscal planning, since survival in the next synced election becomes the priority. This short-term mindset has historically delayed crucial structural reforms.
2. Logistical Complexities Running elections for the whole country at once means over 96.88 crore voters, 11 lakh+ polling stations, and nearly 30 lakh EVMs and VVPATs, way more than what exists today. It also needs 1.5 crore polling staff deployed simultaneously, along with matching storage and security infrastructure.
3. Threat To Federalism ONOE could shake up India's federal balance by pushing states to match their election terms with the Lok Sabha. This clashes with the idea that states are meant to have real autonomy, not just follow a central schedule. When elections happen together, national issues take over, and local concerns like agriculture or language get pushed aside. This weakens regional parties, who exist to represent exactly those local voices.
4. Blurring The National-State Divide A 2015 IDFC Institute study found 77% chance voters pick the same party for both Lok Sabha and Assembly elections when held together, compared to just 61% when spaced six months apart. This shows simultaneous polls blur the line between national and state voting choices. 5. Constitutional Amendments The Constitution doesn't support simultaneous elections. Articles 83 and 172 fix separate terms for the Lok Sabha and state assemblies. Making ONOE work means amending Articles 85, 174, 356, and 324 too. The 255th Law Commission Report flagged this as legally complex. But the real hurdle is political, since any change to state terms affects state autonomy and needs real consensus.
ALTERNATIVES 1. Combine State Assembly and Local Body elections, cuts costs at state level, keeps national polls untouched. This respects state autonomy while easing national-state overlap.
2. Run two election cycles every 2.5 years, one for Lok Sabha and states, one for local bodies. Balances synchronization with practicality.
3. Fix all elections due in a given year to a common date. Needs minimal legal change and tests feasibility for larger synchronization.
SOLUTION
Rather than a one-shot transition, a phased approach works best, first syncing all elections in a given year to one date, then aligning State Assembly and Local Body polls. Full synchronization of Lok Sabha, state, and local elections comes only in the final phase, once the system is tested and stable. This gives time to build political consensus and resolve logistical gaps along the way.