Rabble Rousing Random Ramblings

May 22, 2009

After an unexpectedly resounding win in the 2009 general election, the UPA and its post-poll allies are now in the business of government formation.

Having secured 206 seats, the Congress (I) reckons that it can't be pushed around as it was in 2004. So it is a little more aggressive when it comes to doling out ministries.

Its older allies, who've so far been used to having their way for the last 5 years, now find that the Congress (I) suddenly is talking to them in a different tone, minus the deference of the last five years.

It seems to have turned down a demand for 7 ministries by the DMK, causing the DMK to announce that it would not join the government but only provide outside support.

There can be at most 81 ministers. This is because the NDA government, in 2003, passed an amendment (the 91st amendment), which restricts the total number of ministers, including the Prime Minister, to not exceed 15% of the total number of members of the lower House (Lok Sabha or Legislative Assembly).

The ministry size, including PM Manmohan Singh, must at most be 81, since 15% of 543 is 81.45 and the Supreme Court, a month ago, ruled that the Punjab government cabinet was in accordance with the limit based on the fact that the number being rounded off depending on whether the fraction was < 0.5 or >= 0.5.

The UPA has the support of 274 members [Congress (I) - 206, Trinamool Congress - 19, DMK - 18, NCP - 9, JKNC - 3, JMM - 2, IUML - 2, KC (Mani) - 1, AIMIM - 1 and VCK - 1) with 51 MPs from other parties [SP - 23, BSP - 21, RJD - 4 & LJP - 3] providing outside support.

Working out the proportion of seats each of the pre-poll and post-poll partners in the UPA has (out of 274), we get (numbers rounded-off to 1 decimal place) 75.2% for the Congress (I), 6.9% for the Trinamool, 6.6% for the DMK, 3.3% for the NCP, 1.8% for the RLD, 1.1% for the National Conference, 0.7% for the JMM & IUML, 0.4% for the KC (Mani), AIMIM & VCK and 2.6% for independents. This translates to (when multiplied by 81 and rounded down) 61 ministers from the Congress (I), 6 from the TMC, 5 from the DMK, 3 from the NCP, 2 from independents and 1 each for the NC, JMM, RLD & AIMIM.

The DMK really isn't justified asking for 7 slots in the ministry (3 of them just happen to be Karunanidhi's relatives - children Kanimozhi & Azhagiri and grand-nephew Dayanidhi Maran) when it only has 18 seats. It needed to have got something like 23-25 seats to demand 7 ministries, mainly because the Congress (I) is calling the shots now.

The government is safe in the Rajya Sabha too, since it has the support of 115 MPs. There are 245 seats, but 2 are vacant currently and a further 12 seats will be vacated due to Rajya Sabha MPs getting elected to the Lok Sabha.

I don't really see a need for the Congress (I) to keep entertaining Karunanidhi. He's going to be more pissed off than ever now, since his dear friend is probably dead and the organization he actively supports despite it being banned & declared a terrorist organization by multiple governments in the last 18 years, to which he was party to [except the Narasimha Rao (1991) and Vajpayee governments (1996 & 1998)]. He can go and tie up with the Third Front. The Samajwadi Party can always be co-opted in, especially given they're so eager to support the government so that Mayawati's UP government can be dismissed.

For what its worth, the outgoing Cabinet seems to have a strength of 75 (from the Cabinet Secretariat site) or 77 (from the Wikipedia entry).

Labels: congress (i), dmk, elections, lok sabha, ministers

Posted @ 12:07 AM

Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Add/View 0 comment(s)

May 15, 2009

The 2009 Indian election

Over the next few hours, the results of the election for the 15th Lok Sabha will start coming in. As it is, parties have started negotiations with each other on who will cross-over and at what price.

Then there's the charade of parties potentially abstaining during the vote of confidence so that the majority mark needed reduces, as was considered likely last year in July. That is downright unfair and wrong. The government should have a majority in the house that has been elected. It has to get the support of 272 members of the Lok Sabha.

Unless the BJP and its allies has something like 220-230 seats, I'd find it extremely unlikely that it will form the government. The third and fourth fronts will eventually gravitate to the Congress (I). But, current allies could be cast aside in the pursuit of seats.

The Congress (I) would be more than willing to let go of the Trinamool Congress if they're able to convince the Left parties (and other significant constituents of the 3rd front) into supporting them. The Congress (I) would also be happy to let go of the DMK if the AIADMK gets more seats. In any case, even the DMK is probably thinking along the lines of moving into the 3rd front if the Congress (I) and existing allies say get below 200 seats. The Congress (I) shouldn't find it too hard to wean away Naveen Patnaik's Biju Janata Dal from the third front. Of course, the BJD could still go back to the BJP, but given they walked out just before the elections, it is unlikely. The Congress (I) should get the support of the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) and the Lok Janshakti Party (LJP).

The BJP would probably be willing to talk to the Samajwadi Party because I'm sure the SP is a "more reliable" (to use a relative term) partner in comparison to the Bahujan Samaj Party. Besides, Mayawati would undoubtedly demand the deputy PM post. In any case, Kalyan Singh has already been co-opted into the SP. I don't think the Janata Dal (United) [isn't that an oxymoron?] will stick with the NDA. In the Bihar Assembly, the JD (U) has 86 seats, the BJP has 54, the RJD has 53 and the Congress (I) has 9. If the JD (U) goes with the Congress (I), the BJP will withdraw support and the JD (U) will have to find around 50-odd seats from somewhere. Given that Lalu isn't going to prop up a Nitish Kumar government, it'd be a very stupid self-goal. The Telugu Desam Party is more likely to ally with the BJP since it was part of the NDA government and is opposed to the Congress (I) in the state for which assembly elections were just held. Of course, nothing stops parties from being bitter rivals in the assembly and allies in Parliament. Cases in point: Communists & Congress (I) in Bengal & Kerala and the PMK & DMK in Tamil Nadu.

Mayawati's BSP is still a big question mark. The SP and BSP can't be on the same side [a bit like the Congress (I) & BJP nation-wide and the DMK & AIADMK in TN]. Mayawati's Prime Ministerial ambitions would make anyone wary of doing business with her.

Ramadoss' PMK will be on the winning side. That's for sure.

Anti-BJPism seems to be the flavour of the day. That concept provides a forum for the unlikely alliances such as those including the Congress (I), SP, Left parties, DMK, National Conference, RJD, LJP, etc.

Until around the mid-1990s, the main theme in Indian politics was anti-Congressism. This was mainly because of the long timeframe for which the party had monopolized power at the centre and its penchant for dismissing state governments for blatantly opportunistic reasons. The Bofors controversy brought together so many parties in 1989 to form the National Front government headed by VP Singh (whose death was pretty much anonymous given that he died a few hours after the terror attacks on Mumbai started). In fact, the BJP supported the government from outside! All this when the Congress (I) had got 195-odd seats and was the single largest party. Anti-Congressism was so strong. I guess the vehement opposition to the Congress (I) lasted for around 4-5 years.

By then, the BJP was completely in its Hindutva mode, having destroyed the Babri Masjid (but of course, they'd like you to believe that they merely touched it and the structure was so flimsy it just collapsed). After that, the 1993 bomb blasts and riots happened. From that point onwards, the BJP became a party that very few others were ready to do business with. It took the BJP around 5-6 years to get some credibility and that was mainly because of the political instability between 1996 & 1999 as well as the projection of Atal Bihari Vajpayee as the BJP's head.

But just like anti-Congressism has died out, will anti-BJPism also die out soon?

Having followed multiple elections over the past couple of decades now, I believe the following electoral reforms are needed:

A candidate cannot contest for more than 1 seat - Currently, I don't think there's a limit. As a result, if the candidate is elected from multiple seats, he retains one seat, resigns from the others and there's a by-election at the tax-payer's expense
A candidate who is a current member of the Legislative Assembly cannot contest Lok Sabha seat, and vice versa - This is again to prevent the expenses associated with an unnecessary by-election to the seat that is being given up after a successful election to the other house
A candidate who has lost in the previous 2 Lok Sabha/Assembly elections cannot contest - It is so painfully obvious that the voters, regardless of constituency, have rejected the candidate
A candidate who has lost in the previous Lok Sabha election cannot be nominated to Rajya Sabha - This is to prevent backdoor entry into Parliament, and into the ministry for someone who was rejected by voters, as has happened in the last Lok Sabha election with Shivraj Patil and Arjun Singh
A legislator who has resigned their Assembly/Lok Sabha seat cannot contest in any election for any house (assembly or Lok Sabha) until the tenure of the house ends - While the by-election is required, the candidate who has resigned needs to pay a political price
Only Lok Sabha members should be allowed to become prime ministers - The Prime Minister represents the nation. The Lok Sabha election is a more direct election compared to the Rajya Sabha election. A Prime Minister from the Rajya Sabha doesn't necessarily reflect the country's voters.
Close relatives (blood or through marriage - including spouse, children, siblings, spouse's siblings/parents, siblings's children, grand-children, etc.) of a candidate cannot contest an election to Parliament (Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha) or the state legislatures (Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council) for a period of 5 years after the candidate has contested an election for any of the legislative bodies. So, since (for e.g.) Lalu Prasad Yadav contested the 2009 LS elections, his close relatives (as defined above) cannot contest any elections (to Parliament or state legislatures) until 2014. They are free to contest elections to municipal bodies, Zilla Parishads, panchayats, etc.
Election promises and manifestos should be filed as affidavits - This is to ensure adherence to the promises, force parties to under-promise and reduce the impact of ridiculous promises on the voters
The multiple inaccuracies in voter rolls and photo ID cards need to be corrected - Why is it so tough for whoever is entering the records to type out exactly what's there in the application form? Why does "Jagadish" on the application form become "Jagadeesh" in the voter roll? I'm not sure about the percentages, but I dare say that that the something like 5-10% of those who turn up to vote aren't allowed to do so because their names aren't found in the rolls or because the names don't match or because the photo ID says they're male when they're obviously not

Labels: bjp, congress (i), elections, electoral reforms, left, lok sabha

Posted @ 11:54 PM

Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Add/View 0 comment(s)

March 24, 2009

Why Varun Gandhi presents a wonderful opportunity

Varun Gandhi, formerly known as Sanjay Gandhi & Menaka Gandhi's son, has now officially joined the likes of Bal Thackeray, Narendra Modi, Praveen Togadia, Raj Thackeray, Haji Yaqoob Qureshi and other intolerant Indians. Of course, the way he spoke and the fact that he didn't give two hoots about the law do confirm that he has inherited his father's genes. How ironical that Sanjay Gandhi's son is now a poster-boy for the BJP. The likes of Vajpayee, Advani & George Fernandes, all of who were jailed when Sanjay Gandhi was exercising his 'remote control' authority, would be feeling so proud!

His speech, spewing hatred, got him in trouble with the Election Commission, who then strongly condemned and censured him. In addition, it opined that he didn't deserve to be a candidate and that the BJP should not nominate him as its candidate.

The Election Commission has no legal standing in terms of barring candidates from contesting elections before they have filed their nominations. However, it very much has a right to an opinion, which it voiced. It is for the BJP now to either accept the opinion (not verdict, remember) or reject it.

There are a few criminal cases filed against Varun in UP on the recommendation of the EC, including under section 153A, 295A and 505(2), all of which attract a 3-year jail sentence and/or monetary penalty. If the police do complete their investigation before Varun files his nomination and if he is found guilty by a magistrate/judge, regardless of whether he gets bail, he can be disqualified from contesting the election.

Having seen the speech video several times myself (on TV and online), there's no doubt that Varun Gandhi's words were not doctored and there's no conspiracy to speak of.

As expected, all the other parties are voicing their opinions on whether the BJP should show "moral responsibility" and not nominate him as its candidate. Without holding any brief for the BJP, it's perhaps a good time to point out that almost every party has identified such 'star' candidates - Abdul Nasseer Madani, Sanjay Dutt, Sajjan Kumar & Jagdish Tytler, to name a few. Maybe the Congress (I) should also tell us what Rajiv Gandhi meant when he said 'When a big tree falls, the earth trembles' as justification for the 1984 anti-Sikh riots.

If political parties had any intention of cleaning up their act, I'd like to see one of them step forward and announce that if they were voted to power, they would change the laws to ensure that those who were charged under specific acts in the IPC would not be eligible for nomination and would also be arrested if they were found to be campaigning, whether for themselves or for others. There's an urgent need to further empower the Election Commission, so that we'd not have to depend on parties acting "morally responsibly".

Labels: bjp, congress (i), elections, intolerance, left, varun gandhi

Posted @ 11:30 AM

Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Add/View 0 comment(s)

July 09, 2008

The Karat approach hasn't worked, time for the stick approach

Yesterday, the Left parties announced withdrawal of support to the UPA government, a little over 4 years after they had first supported it from 'outside'.

Although it has been apparent for a while that the 'Loony Left' will pull the plug soon over the civilian nuclear energy agreement with the USA, Prakash Karat now indicates that inflation was a huge factor as well behind the decision. In fact, the UPA government today requested the IAEA secretariat to circulate a draft safeguards agreement to the IAEA Board of Governors.

As a result, the Manmohan Singh government is in a minority and now has sought support from reliable folks like the Samajwadi Party, Janata Dal (S) & the Trinamool Congress to ensure it gets past the half-way mark of 272 seats. The current arithmetic has 226 seats for the UPA constituents and 39 from the Samajwadi Party. Even if you add up those fringe parties and some independents, the number just about crosses 272. That's a huge risk to take given that the government could fall if one of those chaps called in sick or had a brainwave that he shouldn't be supporting a government that he'd opposed for 4 years!

Also, the political price that the Congress (especially) will pay is huge. It is very obvious that support from the Samajwadi Party will require the Congress to reduce the number of seats they will contest in the next elections. In addition, there's a definite corporate agenda as well. The SP's leadership is extremely close to 2 major business groups: Anil Ambani's ADAG & Subrata Roy's Sahara India Pariwar.

Sahara is currently fighting 2 battles: the RBI has prohibited it from accepting new deposits from the public and the UP Government was demolishing part of the Sahara Shahar for alleged encroachment and plan violations.

The Ambani's are at each other's throats again. Anil Ambani's attempts to engage MTN (South Africa) in merger discussions has allegedly been thwarted by Mukesh Ambani's RIL. RIL is obviously making a lot of money from exploration and refining, especially now when crude prices are increasing every day. The Samajwadi Party has asked for extra taxation of 'windfall profits' made by such firms.

With 39 MPs, the SP will ask for Chidambaram & Murli Deora's resignation as well as 4-5 ministries for their MPs. What stops parties with 1 or 2 MPs from also having their own set of demands.

The more honourable thing for the UPA government to do is to resign and call for elections. During the campaign, they can point out why they were right and why the Left wasn't right!

Labels: communist, congress (i), crazy commies, elections, india, left, loony left, nuclear agreement, politics

Posted @ 11:51 PM

Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Add/View 1 comment(s)

May 29, 2008

When the Left's arithmetic is not right

I came across a hilarious claim by the Karnataka state CPI(M) where they claim that since the BJP only got 33.9%, it meant that the verdict was not pro-BJP since 66.1% of the voters were against it.

Here's some news for you, chaps. In the 2004 general elections, as per the Election Commission of India, the CPI and CPI(M) (called the Loony Left or Crazy Commies) secured 2,75,54,725 valid votes out of the total 38,97,79,784 valid votes cast. That works out to a fairly piddly 7.07% votes for them.

Somehow, the absence of a mandate in their favour hasn't stopped them from forcing the UPA government to do their bidding and generally be a pain in the arse!

Labels: bjp, communist, crazy commies, elections, left, loony left

Posted @ 7:58 PM

Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Add/View 0 comment(s)

May 28, 2008

Will politicians be more wary of election-time promises?

In the span of a year, there have now been two violent agitations by Gujjars, led by the Gujjar Arakshan Sangarsh Samiti. These have resulted in loss of lives and destruction of public & private property.

Nitin rightly points out that the BJP and the UPA are both responsible for the state of affairs since the BJP did nothing to oppose the UPA's policies of "doling out entitlements based on group identities."

Lest we forget, all this started when the BJP's Chief Ministerial candidate, Vasundhara Raje, during the 2003 elections to the Rajasthan legislative assembly, promised to get the Gujjars included in the list of Scheduled Tribes. This was a promise that she had no business giving, since only the Union government is responsible for (and empowered to) make changes under the 'Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950'.

When the Gujjars started questioning her about the election promise, she conveniently pointed out that the Union government had to decide on the matter. Obviously the Gujjar leaders got pissed off. This does not obviously mean they have the right to wreck Rajasthan over the issue. If anything, the leaders of the Gujjar Arakshan Sangarsh Samiti, including Colonel Kirori Singh Bainsla, should be jailed under the appropriate section of the Indian Penal Code.

Hopefully one end-result of the Gujjar agitation is that henceforth, politicians will be wary of the promises they give during election rallies. Imagine if the voters started violent uprisings for every single commitment that was not satisfactorily acted upon after the elections!

Labels: elections, gujjar, manifesto, politics, rajasthan, violence

Posted @ 12:44 PM

Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Add/View 0 comment(s)

December 27, 2007

Benazir Bhutto assassinated

Associated Press reports that Pakistan Peoples Party leader and former Pakistan Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto, was assassinated at a rally today.

It is unclear to me right now if she was killed by gunfire from the assassin who then blew himself up, or if she was killed by the explosion.

At least fifteen people were killed in the explosion.

Ironically, Musharraf had declared earlier today that 'No body allowed to sabotage electoral process in country'.

Maybe this doesn't count as sabotage.

What does this mean for the Jan 8 elections? Who's next? Pervez Musharraf will be very quick to cancel the elections and announce another emergency.

Pakistan's prime ministers have had some weird deaths.

Liaquat Ali Khan was assassinated for his policy of moderation vis-a-vis India on the Kashmir issue. HS Suhrawardy, who at best provoked and incited riots, and at worst, did his Nero thing when Bengal burned in 1946 as a consequence of Jinnah's call for a 'Direct Action Day', is believed to have been poisoned. Benazir's father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, was executed for allegedly conspiring to murder the father of a dissident Pakistan Peoples Party politician.

I did some poking around and it seems likely that the PPP politician in question was Mahmud Ali Kasuri, the father of Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri, who was until recently Pakistan's Foreign Minister and seen/heard very often on Indian TV news channels.

Benazir Bhutto was assassinated earlier today. Nawaz Sharif really ought to be doing something to save himself.

Benazir and Sharif looted and destroyed the country for the best part of a decade, beginning with Benazir's first innings in 1988. While she couldn't achieve much in her first term, her second term was notable for her husband Asif Ali Zardari being made Minister, and the subsequent nepotism.

Although her death is a sad event and condemnable, in a warped sense, I hope this is the beginning of a clean-up of Pakistan's political system. The country desperately needs a new generation of leaders.

Her government provided military and financial support to the Taliban. The Taliban gave shelter to Osama's al-Qaeda. It is speculated that she was assassinated by the al-Qaeda, something that the White House spokesperson also hinted at.

If it indeed was the al-Qaeda, it reinforces my belief that you cultivate and breed terrorists at your own risk.

The most hilarious part about George Bush's condolence message is when he says

The United States strongly condemns this cowardly act by murderous extremists who are trying to undermine Pakistan's democracy.

Pakistan's democracy? Is he referring to what exists right now?

Labels: al-qaeda, bhutto, elections, musharraf, pakistan, taliban, terrorism

Posted @ 11:14 PM

Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Add/View 0 comment(s)

February 15, 2007

Ambareesh quits Lok Sabha in protest

'Sandalwood' angry-young-man, grandson of the legendary violinist Chowdiah, Mandya MP and Union Minister of State for Information & Broadcasting, MH Ambareesh resigned from his Lok Sabha seat, in protest over the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal's ruling last week.

He made it clear that power didn't interest him and that he wanted to do his bit to benefit the Kaveri basin farmers of Karnataka.

I hope he lives upto his words and doesn't seek re-election, when a by-election will be announced. I've said it earlier, and I'll say it again. When legislators resign their seats in protest, while switching parties, to score brownie points, or on technicalities, the state must not bear the expenses of the by-election in case they put themselves up as candidates.

In fact, I'm of the opinion that in such situations, those who've resigned must not be allowed to contest any election until the tenure of the legislature completes.

We saw Sonia Gandhi, Chandrasekhar Rao and Siddaramiah do this in the recent past. Now, Navjot Singh Sidhu, is contesting the by-election for the Amritsar constituency. He was convicted by the Punjab & Haryana High Court in December for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, but obtained a Supreme Court stay on the conviction.

Labels: cauvery, elections, karnataka, kaveri, lok sabha, resignation, water

Posted @ 10:37 AM

Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Add/View 0 comment(s)