Simultaneous Polls idea of holding simultaneous elections across India—often referred to as One Nation, One Election—has become a hot topic of debate in recent years. Advocates argue that it will reduce the financial burden and improve governance efficiency, but detractors see it as a deeply flawed and potentially dangerous proposal for India’s democratic fabric. One such critic is actor-turned-politician Kamal Haasan, who has strongly voiced his concerns about the risks this system could pose to the country.
In a wide-ranging discussion, Kamal Haasan laid out his arguments against simultaneous polls, outlining not only the logistical and constitutional challenges but also the societal and political dangers this system might unleash. He warns that the proposal could undermine regional representation, dilute the essence of India’s federalism, and centralize power in ways that could harm the country’s pluralistic democracy.
Background: Understanding the One Nation, One Election Proposal
The concept of simultaneous polls isn’t new. It was first implemented after India’s independence in 1952, when the general elections for both the Parliament and state assemblies were held together. However, due to political instability, this practice broke down over time as state governments dissolved early or extended beyond their terms, requiring elections to be held separately.
Proponents of One Nation, One Election argue that frequent elections result in policy paralysis, unnecessary expenditure, and disrupt governance. They believe a synchronized election schedule would lead to more streamlined government functioning, reduce election-related expenses, and provide governments with a more stable tenure to implement long-term policies.
However, as Kamal Haasan and many other critics have pointed out, the surface appeal of this proposal belies the deeper systemic issues it would create.
Kamal Haasan’s Key Concerns with Simultaneous Polls
1. Erosion of Federalism
India is a federal republic with a delicate balance of power between the central government and state governments. Kamal Haasan argues that holding simultaneous polls will inherently tilt this balance in favor of the center. State elections often focus on local issues, allowing citizens to assess the performance of state governments separately from national ones. With simultaneous elections, Haasan fears that national narratives, personalities, and issues will dominate, making it difficult for regional voices to be heard.
According to Haasan, states would be reduced to being mere extensions of the central government, losing their independent political identity. “India’s diversity is its strength, and state autonomy is the bedrock of our democracy,” he explains. “If state elections are overshadowed by national narratives, how will the unique problems of each region get the attention they deserve?”
2. Impact on Voter Behavior
Haasan emphasizes that voter behavior is often different in national and state elections. Citizens might favor one party for national leadership and another for local governance. For example, a voter might support a party that promises national security at the parliamentary level, while backing a regional party that addresses local development issues in state elections. 
Simultaneous polls could lead to what political scientists call the “bandwagon effect,” where voters align their choices uniformly across both levels, leading to dominance by national parties. Haasan warns that such a system could homogenize politics and weaken the rich tapestry of India’s multi-party democracy. “India is not a monolith; our diversity of thought, culture, and politics should reflect in our electoral outcomes. One election for all levels undermines this complexity,” Haasan argues.
3. Risks of Centralized Power
Another major concern for Kamal Haasan is the potential for simultaneous polls to centralize political power. He warns that if a single party or coalition were to win both national and state elections simultaneously, it could lead to a concentration of power that risks eroding democratic checks and balances.
India’s political landscape has traditionally been pluralistic, with different parties representing various regional, cultural, and linguistic identities. Haasan fears that simultaneous elections could undermine this pluralism by consolidating power in the hands of a few dominant players. “A strong opposition is crucial for any democracy,” he explains. “Simultaneous polls could weaken the opposition by allowing one political narrative to dominate both the national and state-level discourse.”
4. Practical and Logistical Challenges
Kamal Haasan also points out the numerous practical challenges of implementing One Nation, One Election. Elections in India are logistically complex undertakings, involving the deployment of security forces, election officials, and polling infrastructure across vast and diverse terrains. Ensuring that all elections—parliamentary and state assemblies—are held on the same day or within a narrow time window would strain the country’s administrative machinery.
Furthermore, Haasan raises concerns about what would happen if a state government collapsed or a national government lost a majority between election cycles. Would the entire country be forced into elections again? Would those states go into temporary President’s Rule? These questions remain unanswered, leaving room for ambiguity that could undermine democratic processes.
Haasan also worries that the requirement for synchronized terms would put pressure on political leaders to artificially extend or curtail terms of government. “What happens when a state government is dissolved? Will we force the people to wait until the next national election to vote in a new government?” he asks. “This is not just a logistical problem but a democratic one.”
5. Threat to Regional Parties
India’s political landscape is vast and varied, with national parties coexisting alongside strong regional parties. Kamal Haasan fears that simultaneous elections could spell doom for smaller regional parties that play a crucial role in representing the interests of specific states or communities. These regional players might find it difficult to compete with the national parties’ resources and the dominance of national-level issues.
Haasan believes that regional parties, which often bring hyper-local concerns into the political dialogue, could be eclipsed in a simultaneous election scenario, where voters are more likely to be swayed by national issues and personalities. “In many states, regional parties have been crucial in voicing the needs of local communities, whether it’s language, culture, or economic issues. Their role cannot be dismissed, and simultaneous elections may marginalize these voices,” Haasan explains.
6. Democratic Representation and Accountability
One of the core pillars of any democracy is accountability. Frequent elections allow voters to periodically evaluate their leaders, ensuring that political representatives remain accountable to the public. Kamal Haasan fears that by synchronizing elections, the frequency of voter engagement would decrease, and with it, the accountability of elected representatives.
In India, where political climates can shift rapidly due to socio-economic changes, voters need the opportunity to express their evolving preferences. A system of frequent elections ensures that governments remain sensitive to the needs and demands of the electorate. “If elections are held only once every five years, what incentive will politicians have to remain responsive to the public’s needs between election cycles?” Haasan asks.
Alternatives to Simultaneous Polls: Kamal Haasan’s Vision
While Haasan is vocally opposed to the idea of One Nation, One Election, he is not opposed to electoral reforms. He believes that India’s electoral system does need improvements, particularly in addressing issues like election-related expenses and governance disruptions. However, he proposes alternative solutions rather than embracing the potentially hazardous system of simultaneous elections. 
1. Phased Electoral Reforms
Instead of holding simultaneous elections, Haasan advocates for reforms that focus on addressing specific issues with the current system. For example, he suggests that reforms could be introduced to limit the use of money in elections, or to streamline the process of government formation to reduce delays.
2. Staggered Elections with Shorter Campaign Periods
One possible reform is to maintain separate elections for states and the center but reduce the lengthy campaign periods that often disrupt governance. By shortening the campaign duration, elections can be less disruptive to everyday administration. Haasan also suggests that election campaigns should focus more on policy debates and governance, rather than being reduced to personality contests.
3. Strengthening Regional Governance
To balance the centralization of power, Haasan proposes strengthening regional governance mechanisms. By empowering state governments and regional political structures, India can ensure that local issues are addressed effectively without the need for simultaneous polls. This approach would help maintain the diversity and federal character of Indian politics.
Conclusion: A Danger to Indian Democracy?
Kamal Haasan’s critique of One Nation, One Election is grounded in his belief that India’s strength lies in its diversity—politically, culturally, and socially. By forcing all states and the center to hold elections simultaneously, Haasan warns that the country risks diluting the voice of its regions and consolidating power in ways that could weaken its democratic framework.
While the idea of simultaneous polls might seem efficient on the surface, the deeper implications for India’s federal structure, regional representation, and democratic accountability make it a flawed and dangerous proposition, according to Haasan. Rather than risking the future of India’s pluralistic democracy, Haasan urges the nation to consider alternative electoral reforms that respect the country’s complex and diverse political landscape. ALSO READ:- Indian Teams Rack Up Draws in the Ninth Round: A Day of Mixed Fortunes at the Chess Championships 2024