Why “Good People†don’t join “Politicsâ€
More than 3 years ago, I published a brief review of one of the chapters in Sanjeev Sabhlok‘s book, “Breaking Free of Nehru” in which I wrote…
Sanjeev’s basic contention is “…our flawed electoral system (which forces 99% of our candidates to get huge amounts of black money and to liaise with the mafia while contesting elections) creates the incentives for corruption”…The kind of people our system attracts are power- and money-hungry individuals “who are not reflective on their use of power, unaware of the concept of freedom, and unwilling to listen to expert policy advice or innovations designed to create a great India”
…Unless we “build systems that will attract some of our best people to run for government…we are destined to perpetual mediocrity; perhaps much worse”.
The review was sub-titled, “Here’s how to begin fixing the system…”. And one of its conclusions was:
There are so many compulsions for dishonesty built into our electoral system that good people simply aren’t interested in representing us.
One of the biggest of these “compulsions” is the vast amount of money needed for political campaigning (and getting media attention). This “compulsion” makes a complete mockery of the limit on electoral candidate – which is Rs 25 Lakhs per constituency. Unsurprisingly, the “limit” is routinely violated but lack of accountability and absence of any consequences of such a violation means that the system perpetuates such distortions. This issue of electoral spending and campaign financing is at the heart of corruption in India – something that most people are unable – or unwilling – to recognise and accept.
So I was heartened to come across two unconnected references recently that specifically alluded to this issue. The first was a sound-bite in Fortune India from Kiran Karnik (Head, NASSCOM) in an article titled, “12Â Tasks of India Inc”. Referring to the fight against corruption, Sh Karnik said:
If we have a clear way to account for political campaign funding, a huge part of the battle is won..
The second reference came from Nixon Fernando, who has been working closely with Sh T N Seshan for the last several years. Nixon came to a similar conclusion in his analysis (emphasis added):
So where does one start setting things right? …… The best hope is in the political field…
..It all starts with the filter process that is in place to take people into the legislatures—the election process in our country. By fair estimates an MP hopeful requires an army of 5000 men dedicatedly working for him for at least two months in the period just before and after elections in order to ensure that he gets elected…on an average it would take Rs 13 lakh to send a one rupee post card to each voter in a Lok Sabha constituency. What does one do when the ceiling on expenditure is Rs 15 lakh?
The answer is that everything is pushed underground. The required moneys are generated through dubious ways, hidden in dubious ways and are spent in dubious ways. People are head over heels to get ‘lucrative’ ministries...With such a system in place, the platform is set for the system to rot at the very top.
..Mr. TN Seshan has argued that most persons who enter the Lok Sabha enter it by first signing on a lie that they have spent less than the designated ceiling….Would Lord Rama spend more and then sign on a declaration of that kind in order to enter even the parliament? No he would not! And so the gates of the highest forum of productive deliberation and law making in a nation are not open to the ‘Maryada Purushottam’! Those that are inspired by the values of the Maryada Purushottam, are denied entry into the sanctum sanctorum of democracy in the country. An Obama cannot rise in this country and one can understand here why.
We have effectively set up a gate post in politics where it is said that ‘you have to be dishonest to enter’.
…If India should have hope of getting in a batch of top class Indians into the parliament then the ceiling should go, and the entire process of collection and expenditure of funds for elections should be made transparent.
Image inspired by this post, courtesy Imagining India
But what can you and I do? Are we able to influence any of this? Actually, we can. This is what Nixon suggests:
Pin down each parliamentarian on this issue of transparency in the system and don’t let him wriggle out;
Let the people in the respective constituencies know of the stance taken by each of the parliamentarians on this matter…Ask all of them why they are not allowing the admission of ‘Maryada Purushottam’ into the parliament.
Remember that the political class is vocal and can play to the gallery. They will say such things as ‘we have kept a ceiling to ensure that everyone can contest’—it is a façade. And given their talent they will use diversionary tactics of setting up commissions, having discussions, look for consensus, link it to other controversial issues… when such things happen know that the politician is up to his game…If one is serious about cleaning up the process, it is not the pimples one should go after; clear the blood. The game is not about judging individuals; the need is to create a filter process in elections where talent and high values get into the parliament—the system needs correction.
Well said…Unfortunately far too many of us (still) believe that the best way to fight corruption is stringent punishment or to have laws like RTI – or to have “good people” stand for elections. While all these are good things (necessary but not sufficient), they do nothing to address the root cause.
Unless the focus shifts on reform of the electoral system specifically, spending limits and campaign financing, scams and scandals will continue…CWG and 2G will be forgotten- to be replaced by new acronyms and ever-larger sums of money. And unless these reforms are put in place, there is little chance of “good people” getting into politics – much less being able to win…free agents or no free agents.
Related Posts: Here’s how to “fix the system” and “Why don’t good people get into politics?”
For more on campaign financing etc, pl read the comments on “Dear Chetan, you are wrong..“
You cannot fix the system because the people in charge of fixing the system are corrupt. And you cannot elect good people and place them in charge of the system because the system is broken. There is no way out.
You say an Obama cannot rise in India. I suggest to you that an Obama can. The difficulty he/she faces now, is the lack of an appropriate platform to speak from. Neither of the two national parties can attract a potential Obama. One started well with a laudable vision but over the years got corrupted chasing power at any cost. Other, sincere as they may be have an impractical faulty vision of recreating the past that appears to be leaving out the minorities.
If Obama were to rise, he/she has a monumental task of starting a new national party. Of course it is possible that an Obama can take over one or the other party and rebuild it in his/her own image. Who know?
I was pretty shocked to learn that some politicians in India wanted to legalize lobbying which is nothing but legalized corruption. At least now there’s some shame in corruption and the 2G scams etc.
In the US, it’s shocking the way politicians openly reveal how much money they’re getting from oil companies for example and print it on their website. And then when they vote for oil interests (such as blocking more stringent payouts after the BP disaster) it’s obvious who’s paying them.
Legalizing corruption doesn’t make it go away!
Shantanu,
Let us face it: democracy is a game of selecting the most popular dude on the block, not the most efficient administrator. Putting the responsibility of choosing the best administrator in the hands of common public yields the same quality that champions of various music reality shows achieve – a presentable look and a good background story created to garner sympathy, not past achievements or educational qualifications or intelligence. Apparently, democracy only selects mediocre. I am reminded of Mr. HL Mencken’s quote in the context of American politics:
"As democracy is perfected, the office of President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."Now, if that is the case, why would some other democracies become successful? If you notice, the successful democracies managed to setup a team of elites who are not only efficient at protecting the interest of their nation but also provide a path for talented young men to join their ranks. Take USA as example. There are couple of think tanks in DC which are in control of economic/foreign/health/commerce policies regardless of who is in the white house. Example: council of foreign relations. That is also the reason central themes in those policies do not change over time. How do they do it? These bipartisan think tanks supply their services to the powerful politicians of both the parties in US and also employ very smart people who come in touch of these ambitious politicians. Thus when politicians get important positions in the government they turn to these think tanks to supply them smart workers.
Now one may argue that this is one way of forming elite-politician nexus. But this nexus in wide open in public, not described in hush hush tone as it is done in India. Therefore, this nexus gets subject to open scrutiny. When realist Sardar patel created IAS, his vision was to supply capable administrators who are neutral in their political orientation. There are people like TN Seshan who upheld that tradition. From Indira Gandhi’s first term things went downhill. PN Haskar, an influential man in Gandhi administration and a former administrator himself, manipulated the system so well that a Mughal Darbar like culture formed around Indira Gandhi. Couple this with the lack of spine in the media and our long habit of sucking up to personality cults and you have a system which prefers sycophancy over merit and pedigree above efficiency.
One way to get out of this mess was to push for a better layer of administrators who would not suck up to the politicians. How this would work in our system is not clear. Another may be to create a minimum criteria for getting elected: something like experience of working in the government before or doing social service before, having minimal educational qualification and serving the army. Corruption would exist where there is big money and small set of decision makers are involved. If we want to rollback corruption, we have to push for more rollback of government tentacles under oversight committees and better regulatory structure to watch private enterprises.
Shantanu,
This is a great reality of Indian politics. I am a member of Lok Satta here in Hyd and young member of the group do such great things and it never gets publised or shown in the media. Unless we have money and muscle power no one cares about what and how you do. If we have to reach out to the masses we need media and as proven recently it is corrupt to the core.
Could you please define “Good People” or explain what your (or Lok Satta’s or whichever group’s) idea is when he/it says “Good People”?
Do you mean intelligent (not easy to measure that, and it changes with time)? bold ? strong? honest (don’t forget almost everyone lies about 10 times in a week if one is to believe reported research)?
i) The Future of Freedom by Fareed Zakaria offers some interesting insights. That all change has been brought about by strong, affluent, public minded independent capable individuals. Today, assuming the Azim Premji Foundation executes its vision, a sea change will be brought about in Indian education. How come there aren’t more Premji’s? The robber barons, for example, of the US (eg Carnegie to Rockefeller) provide lessons in the creation of public institutions.
ii) Why did Ratan Tata or Anand Mahindra give money to Harvard and not invest in creating/upgrading/reforming institutions? Why do Indian think tanks, to the extent they exist, have to depend on overseas funding? Why does a Narayana Murthy give $5m to the Clay Sanksrit Society? JRD Tata created public institutions – IISc, TIFR, TISS, NIAS etc etc. What public institutions have any others created?
iii) In my view, it is easier for capable honest public minded individuals to create public institutions (from governance watches to legal challenges to policy research to education to media exposes etc etc) than to stand for elections and win! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatantra_Party offers some lessons in this regard.
iv) The formation of strong independent institutions creates strong awareness and a platform for political change.
Slightly off topic. I shocked that Narayanamurthy gave money to Clay SAnskrit foudation. A look at Clay SAnkrit library website lists only Western SAnskrit “Scholars” including the infamous Wendy Doniger.
A western “scholar” can never get the context and hence the translation right. One gets inspired when one listens to Velukudi Krishnan’s explanation in Tamil and I am sure there may be similar scholars in other Indian languages. People broadly following the Sanatana Dharma lifestyle and people who have observed the austeriety followed by some elders of previous generation will be more able to explain the relevance to today’s life style. Western “scholar” will do only a literal translation which does little justice to such great poems such as Mahabharatha and Ramayana. In the literal traslation, the overall message to humanity will be lost and it will be treated as yet another treatise on battle of Good over Evil.
More thoughts from Narayanamurhty’s contribution to Clay Sanskrit. One wonders why not SAmskrita Bharathi? Why do Indians of Narayanamurhty’s stature need to look upto Western Scholars?
I had mentioned this earlier in my comment in an earlier post of Shantanu’s. 5000 years of Indian culture, “true” (as much as we know and understand and without worrying about politics) Indian history, scientific achievements, in the arts, architecture and literature with the aim of inculcating pride in one’s culture and nation must be propagated through books, exclusive TV channel and any other means to the masses.
When there is pride in one’s identity, at least treasonous acts of corruption may not occur or corrupt people may have very little chances of getting elected.
Bhagwad , yeh thune pahala baar truth kaha dala
Wonder pe thunder thune pahela baar american papad petrol me fry kaar diya.
Post 7 & 8,
I agree , Narayanamurthy should have given it to
http://www.taralabalu.org/panini/
It is in Karnataka from where Naryanamurthy hails. If not Narayanamurthy , why dont we netizens contribute to this humble , true scholar of Sanskrit. There is donor site to your right hand side when you click on the quoted web site above.
All: Thanks for some very thoughtful comments…I will try and respond later today or tomorrow…
Guys, focus; Are you honest? infallibly so? if you are, would you contest elections? No, you cannot!!! that is our system!!
what Mr. Shantanu is saying that you take off the ceiling and you have opened the gate for an Obama to rise in India… Dont worry, he will collect the money, by the rupee, from each Indian and he will win elections…
can you open the gate? can you get the ceiling off? can you get transparency in party funding and election funding?