Column

Three days to go. Have you made up your mind which way to vote? Most of us vote the way we have always voted: some of us are traditionally Congress, some of us for the BJP, while others will support a regional party which is powerful in the state. A few voters will sit on the fence and keep their minds open about which way to go till the very last minute. There will also be the voter whose choice changes from election to election, the kind who’s always dissatisfied with the way the government is run and will therefore vote for the opposition.

What kind of voter are you?

After 26/11, the upper middle class voter has not only been shaken out of his apathy, he’s also begun to feel that his vote can make a difference. This is especially so in an uncertain close election as this one where a few thousand votes may swing a seat this way or that. But inspite of this new found awareness, and the strong desire to ‘do something’, many of these voters still seem confused by age-old issues.

The first is: candidate or party? In other words, should a vote be cast for a well-qualified candidate irrespective of his party? Or for a particular party, irrespective of the candidate?

In an ideal world, such a dilemma would not present itself to the voter, because each political party would pick the best qualified candidate. But this is not an ideal world, so parties often pick a less than satisfactory person because of his caste or religion or his nuisance value.

The second confusion stems from the role of a member of Parliament. An elected MP first and foremost makes up the numbers. By winning his seat he contributes to the tally of his party and determines whether it will form the government or sit in the opposition. Since making up the numbers does not need any qualifications, it seems obvious to me that you vote for the party, not the candidate.

As far as choosing the party is concerned, you can either go by what your parents have done or use rational yardsticks to evaluate political outfits. Is it a national or regional party? Do its aspirations represent the whole country’s? Will a government formed by this party represent all sections of the Indian people?

There are other criteria. The most important one to me is: who will become the prime minister if this party wins? What are his qualifications and records? What ideology does he follow.and is his ideology so rigid that it will thwart pragmatic solutions? Does he have a vision for the country? How will he conduct himself internationally? And does he command enough respect in the world to get his voice heard?

Local issues quite naturally agitate the voter whether living in a slum or on Carmichael Road. An MP cannot do too much about micro-local problems because those are directly dealt with by corporators or MLAs. But that does not mean that an MP is completely ineffective. To start with, a good MP can persuade, cajole and even arm-twist the local corporator or MLA to solve local problems. He can get central projects or central funds allocated for essentials like infrastructure, water supply and sanitation.

A really effective MP can go beyond that to play an important behind-the-scenes role in formulating long-term policies on issues like centre-state relationships or in influencing vital new legislation such as the right to information act. Or in future legislation bring about the office of a CEO for metropolitan cities. Obviously the MP’s effectiveness is increased many fold if he belongs to the ruling party.

As for the independent candidates much of the upper middle-class is presently enamoured with, they have no role to play in Parliament, however qualified they are for one simple reason: they have no chance of getting elected.

Yes, it’s three days to go, consider your options carefully and above all, be pragmatic. We are talking of governance, not a debating society.