Present Voting System-Challenges To The And Solutions

In a representative democracy, the best way of expressing an individual's

opinion on the working of a political party for the betterment of himself is the Vote. In a
Democracy, the value of vote is as important as the value of Haemoglobin in Human body.
his is demonstrated by !rticle "#$ of the Indian %onstitution which states that &lections to
the House of the people and to the legislative assemblies of states must be on the basis of
adult suffrage. he %onstitution'makers were far'sighted in their thoughts and actions and
thus, they could make our country as one of the earliest ones in the world which adopted
universal adult franchise to all those above #( years of age, without any discrimination of
caste, race, religion, sex, literacy, wealth, etc. hey adopted this as they realised the
importance of vote in an effective democracy. In ()*), to represent the views of the younger
generation, the age restriction was reduced to (* years from #( years, by the $(
st
%onstitutional !mendment !ct +()**,. his was a milestone for the electoral process. It
brought a change in the manner the political system is seen by the youth. Inspite of electoral
reforms in various aspects over the years, the voting system adopted in ()-('-# is still
persistent. .ne of the reasons for this is a lack of a fool'proof alternative to the /irst'0ast'
he'0ost +/00, system. However, one should remember that even the /00 system is not a
fool'proof one and is sub1ected to severe criticism.
0roblems in /irst'0ast'he'0ost +/00, system2
he /00 system has its origins in an age'old saying, 34inner takes it all5.
hus, the person who gets the most votes in an election is deemed to get the tag of winner.
6ut, this system falls short on two accounts. .ne is the assumption that the winner is the
person getting the largest mandate and thus, the public approval. his is 7uite a fallacy as is
evident in a multi'party system. It is often observed that the winning candidate of an election
in a constituency is hardly able to get 89 percent of the total votes polled. :imple logic
suggests that if a person is not preferred by about $9 percent of the population, he is not fit to
be winner. hus, the entire concept of winning an election by this system is a deceit. he
second shortcoming is that the entire basis of /00 system is on the foundation that there
must be winners and losers in an election. Democracy does not mean either of these. It is
about discussion, debate, consensus, mandate and most importantly, representation. ;odern
democracies take pride in the fact that they hold the authority to take decisions by the elected
members as they are the representatives of the society. However, representation does not
necessarily always account to winning. /or instance, a candidate chosen by ") percent of the
public is as good a representative as a candidate with 89 percent votes. 6ut, the /00 system
allows only the latter to be the representative, while terming the former as a loser. his also
leads to the problem that the party which gets 89< of the total votes polled would be having
around --'$9< of the representatives in the legislature.
:ide'effects of /002
!part from these serious problems in the /00 system, there are many other
side'effects which need to be addressed. he first issue is the non'representation of minorities
in the houses of representatives. ;inority in this aspect does not only refer to caste, religion,
sex or race, but also to those who have a definite ob1ective in their election agenda. hese
candidates are contesting in the elections to represent the issues which he=she thinks are most
important and crucial for a certain sections of people. he chances of those candidates getting
elected in /00 system are minimal as they do not appeal to the large masses. /or instance, if
a candidate takes up the issue of problems faced by a certain sections of tribes in an area,
he=she, most probably, would not be representing them in the legislatures as they account to
only a fraction of constituency. 6ut, in an ideal democracy, their voices should be heard too.
!nother side'effect of the /00 system is the increase in vote'buying. his is a
#'step process. In the first step, the vote of an individual is made either extremely valuable or
utterly useless. his is in reference to whether he supports a potential winning or a possible
losing candidate. hough the competition is among many, the real fight for the throne is
between two, or in some cases, three candidates. hus, the 3minority5 +as defined earlier,
section supporting anyone other than these would be considered as 3wasting their precious
vote5. he second step of actual vote'buying starts then. It is an undeniable fact that each of
the potential'winning candidates has a strong base of #9'#- percent of vote share, which
cannot be easily disturbed. he 7uest for the remaining (9 percent of votes to be distributed
among these candidates is a difficult process which makes those (9< voters aware that their
vote is of high value to the candidates, but, sadly, not for him. ;ost of them are usually of
uneducated and unemployed background and thus sell their votes to the highest bidder.
Solution Strategy:
o address these issues, the concept of negative voting in the form of >ule 8)'.
in the %onduct of &lections >ules, ()$(, has been introduced. However, this has seldom been
used by the voters as it involved a tedious and intriguing process of announcing to the
returning officer that he would like to exercise that option. his denies the secrecy of the
vote. >ecently, the :upreme %ourt of India ordered the &lection %ommission to include
3?one .f he !bove5 +?.!, option in the &lectronic Voting ;achines +&V;s, to enable
privacy and also to decide on the outcome if ?.! gets the highest public mandate. he
&lection %ommission has duly replied that even though ?.! gets the mandate, the
candidate who gets the #
nd
highest vote would be declared as elected with accordance to the
>epresentation of 0eoples !ct. hus, the sole purpose of introducing ?.! has been
negated.
0roportional >epresentation2
4hen the search of fool'proof system does not give satisfactory results, it is
always better to go for a better system for the present and keep on improving it instead of
being inactive in the issue. .ne possible alternative to the /00 system is the 0roportional
>epresentation +0>, system of election. his system is already effectively implemented in the
&uropean countries like @ermany and :outh !merican countries like VeneAuela, and recently
in some parts of !ustralia and ?ew Bealand.
he 0> system basically works on the premise that elections in democracies are
to elect representatives and not winners. o achieve this, instead of a single'winner
constituency, they have multi'member constituencies, which are larger in siAe and population
than those of ours. he voters choose their candidate and=or party. ! number of members in
each constituency are elected on the basis on the number of representatives allotted to that
constituency and their respective vote share. hus, a constituency can have, for instance, - or
(9 representatives from same or different political parties, in the legislature. hus, the
difference between the candidate with ")< and 89< vote share is reduced.
his process also solves the problem of vote'buying as it effectively eliminates
the two issues responsible for it +mentioned earlier,. he 3minority5 section can also be
represented effectively with this kind of system. !lso, the vote share of a party is effectively
seen in the representation of that party in the houses. hese merits made the 0> system an
indispensable tool in the effective functioning of democracy in many countries.
Conclusion:
he right to vote is not effective unless it is accompanied by a right to
representation. In a multi'party system like ours, it is indisputable that the /00 system of
voting is an ineffective way of representation. he &lection %ommission should realise this
and make proper reforms in the voting system. >esearch should be carried on by taking the
examples of the countries following different voting systems and analysis should be done in
the way it is effective and better than ours. !lternatives like the 0roportional >epresentation
system should be introduced as an experiment in elections of ;unicipalities, 0anchayats or
Cegislative %ouncils. he results should be analysed properly. If it is found to be more
effective than the present system, it should be adopted in the state assemblies and Cok :abha
elections after properly educating the voters about the system. his would assist in a healthy
democracy and enable every individual to have the right to representation.
>eferences2
(. Indian 0olity by Caxmikanth, ;H
#. https2==www.mtholyoke.edu=acad=polit=damy=6eginnning>eading=beginningreadings.htm
by Viswanath 6?: