Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman is not contesting the Lok Sabha polls citing financial constraints. Truth be told, she is stating the obvious—elections have become far costlier over the decades. We are now at a juncture where it is perhaps impossible for a leader with even a decent income to enter the electoral fray. This is especially so in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. In the outgoing Andhra Pradesh assembly, nine out of every 10 legislators are crorepatis. Read this number with the share of legislators having criminal cases against them—about half—and it is clear that money and muscle power are at play. There is no reason to believe that the next assembly would be any different. In Telangana, 96 percent of the current assembly members are crorepatis and 82 percent have cases against them.
We can safely infer that politics in the country has become an exclusive preserve of the rich, though they come from different backgrounds—mostly political dynasties, the corporate and business world, and real estate. It is a wonder people make much of political rhetoric but fail to give importance to the money bags. In the pre-independence era, and thereafter for a few decades, politics was considered a service. It was the norm for leaders to sacrifice their lives, not to speak of their wealth, for the country. The system has since been usurped as politics has come to be seen as a sure-shot way to power and money.
We have laws restricting campaign finance. The upper expenditure limit for a Lok Sabha candidate is `95 lakh; for assembly, it is `40 lakh. In practice, the figure often shoots up to `100 crore and `50 crore, respectively, depending on the constituency. As for the parties themselves, there is no limit. The Law Commission had in the late 1990s recommended state funding of elections and the Election Commission had recommended a cap. The problem is that lawmakers themselves are the deciders and are unlikely to cede ground. The Election Commission, despite good intentions, has rarely penalised a candidate strictly for excessive expenditure. Ideally, the institution must be empowered to track expenditures and disqualify candidates. The onus is also on voters to make money power redundant and reject those who seek to bribe them. Until then, our democracy will continue to be compromised.