Tuesday, June 10, 2014
Should India have proportional representation ?
I do not believe that calls for proportional representation in India carry any weight in the current context. After 63 years of a certain system, what is the trigger to switch to proportional representation ? Merely the fact that a single party has an absolute majority of it's own by securing just a little under 30 % of the vote ?
This call to 'reform' the system is manifestly false as the motivation is not electoral reform but to discredit the achievements of the single party. The first-past-the-post rule has been well-understood by everyone in the last few decades and regional parties have exploited it disproportionately in the era of coalition politics. (The thought that regional parties with 20-30 seats and sub 3 % vote-share could sometimes dictate national policy on security (say Sri Lanka) in opposition to the national interest was a perverted sense of democracy.)
So lets for a moment examine what would happen if we suddenly did away with the current system. In an instant all regional parties would lose their power. Because even the most dominant regional party can not get more than 5 % of the vote and 5 % of the seats - 25 seats at best. So now, lets do the math. In such a situation, say no party can realistically get 50% of the vote and hence seats. Hence we will have a proportional representation as follows :
In our system "Majority is 50%". Why 50 % ? What is so special about 50% ? Because 50% is first-past-the-post in a 2-party situation. Say that there are only 2 parties and the voteshare split is 51-49% of the vote-share. One view could be - how can the 51 % party be the ruling party as 49% of the voters have rejected it ? (the same argument put right now with the nos changed)
We can do one of the two things if we want to go to proportional representation in a multi-party system:
In any case no voting system is perfect. For a mathematical explanation click here.
This call to 'reform' the system is manifestly false as the motivation is not electoral reform but to discredit the achievements of the single party. The first-past-the-post rule has been well-understood by everyone in the last few decades and regional parties have exploited it disproportionately in the era of coalition politics. (The thought that regional parties with 20-30 seats and sub 3 % vote-share could sometimes dictate national policy on security (say Sri Lanka) in opposition to the national interest was a perverted sense of democracy.)
So lets for a moment examine what would happen if we suddenly did away with the current system. In an instant all regional parties would lose their power. Because even the most dominant regional party can not get more than 5 % of the vote and 5 % of the seats - 25 seats at best. So now, lets do the math. In such a situation, say no party can realistically get 50% of the vote and hence seats. Hence we will have a proportional representation as follows :
- Party no 1 : 30%
- Party no 2 : 20%
- Party no 3 : 8%
- Long tail of say 30 parties each between 0-5% of the voteshare
In our system "Majority is 50%". Why 50 % ? What is so special about 50% ? Because 50% is first-past-the-post in a 2-party situation. Say that there are only 2 parties and the voteshare split is 51-49% of the vote-share. One view could be - how can the 51 % party be the ruling party as 49% of the voters have rejected it ? (the same argument put right now with the nos changed)
We can do one of the two things if we want to go to proportional representation in a multi-party system:
- Only allow 'national' parties to compete for Lok Sabha (the current definition is a technical one of % voteshare plus representation in 4 states). In that case, most of the regional parties will get bumped-off. Do we want that ? Perhaps 'No' as India is an incredibly diverse country with a plurality which is mind-blowing. Sections of the population should be allowed to express their POV though the ballot - even if such views seem to be parochial. Democracy is about diverse opinions even though you might not agree with some.
- Allow the multi-party system of proportional representation but there should be nothing sacrosanct about 50 %. Basically the party with the highest vote-share governs. Realize that this is first-past-the-post at a voteshare level vs the constituency level.
In any case no voting system is perfect. For a mathematical explanation click here.
Four Vectors of Political Parties
In India there are four vectors of political parties. They are parties primarily based on :
1. Caste
2. Religion
3. Region
4. Class
The core appeal for all parties is one or more of the above. In that sense, the Congress is the only party which has an appeal across all vectors.
The question is that which of these vectors will remain viable over the next 20-30 years and which ones will fade away into oblivion. For example, one can postulate that caste will become increasingly unimportant in a rapidly urbanising country.
One answer to that question can be looking at the experience of other parts of the world and see which way have they gone. After a lengthy discussion, here are a few thoughts that I will leave right now and come back later for validation.
- The caste vector will rapidly merge into the class vector. At the end of the day, the caste divide will only become an economic one where the lower castes will want to have more economic independence.
- The religion vector will continue to remain as an important element but the distribution of religions of India is such that the core minority vote banks will be it might increasingly splinter into different parties who want to focus on the 'minority' vote.
-The region vector is the only one that will have to continue to have it's appeal for some more time. Since India is very plural in terms of language, customs etc this will continue to be an important dynamic. Regional parties will continue to pull in considerable heft as they look to secure their 'pound of flesh' from the central govt.
1. Caste
2. Religion
3. Region
4. Class
The core appeal for all parties is one or more of the above. In that sense, the Congress is the only party which has an appeal across all vectors.
The question is that which of these vectors will remain viable over the next 20-30 years and which ones will fade away into oblivion. For example, one can postulate that caste will become increasingly unimportant in a rapidly urbanising country.
One answer to that question can be looking at the experience of other parts of the world and see which way have they gone. After a lengthy discussion, here are a few thoughts that I will leave right now and come back later for validation.
- The caste vector will rapidly merge into the class vector. At the end of the day, the caste divide will only become an economic one where the lower castes will want to have more economic independence.
- The religion vector will continue to remain as an important element but the distribution of religions of India is such that the core minority vote banks will be it might increasingly splinter into different parties who want to focus on the 'minority' vote.
-The region vector is the only one that will have to continue to have it's appeal for some more time. Since India is very plural in terms of language, customs etc this will continue to be an important dynamic. Regional parties will continue to pull in considerable heft as they look to secure their 'pound of flesh' from the central govt.
