Do you think money grows on trees? That was what Prime Minister Manmohan Singh supposedly told the delegation of MPs from Orissa who came to him to plead their state’s cause. (It sounds a little out of character for the mild-mannered economist turned politician but as that is what the MPs insist he told them.)Orissa has been ruled since 1999 by a Biju Janata Dal-Bharatiya Janata Party coalition and a Congress prime minister need not be expected to betray any particular sympathy for such a state. And that attitude may go to explain why the voters of Maharashtra may choose to vote the Congress-Nationalist Congress Party regime back to power.Can we call it the “incumbency advantage” of assembly polls? Briefly stated, all other things being equal, voters will choose the same party to rule the state as is currently ruling the country. It makes sense because the prudent voter is hoping that the Union government shall favour his/her state when it comes to doling out the goodies. (The exception to the rule is Delhi where the Union government is forced to pamper the city-state irrespective of which party is in power.) The “incumbency advantage” does not work when there is a wave — as there was in Maharashtra in 1994 — but in the absence of any polarising emotions it is a rational decision.But what does a voter do when he is asked to choose between coalition partners? That is what the electors of Bidar are being asked to decide as this Lok Sabha seat in Karnataka goes in for a by-election.The seat was won for the BJP in the General Election by Ramchandra Veerappa, polling 312,838 votes to the 289,217 won by Narsingrao Hulla Suryawanshi of the Congress. The interesting thing is that there was a third strong candidate in the fray, Motiram Chowdhary of the Janata Dal (Secular), who got a handsome tally of 173,291 votes. Arithmetic suggests that the anti-BJP forces would have carried the day had they joined forces. And the subsequent decision of the Congress and Deve Gowda’s Janata Dal (Secular) to form a coalition government in Bangalore underlines the force of that logic.But isn’t it axiomatic that politics is more about chemistry than arithmetic? The death of the nonagenarian — nobody seems to be quite sure of his age — Veerappa has led to something of a mirror contest. The BJP has decided to put up Basawraj Ramchandra Veerappa, the son of the late MP, as its nominee. That was perhaps predictable. What has shocked many observers is the decision of the Congress and the Janata Dal (Secular) to put up their own men — Narsing Halla Suryawanshi and Babu Honna Naik respectively. (The Bahujan Samaj Party, which had not contested the seat in the General Election, has chosen to muddy the waters by nominating Chandrakanth Gaddgi.)This has caused to some very peculiar campaigning in Bidar. Both Narsing Halla Suryawanshi and Babu Honna Naik are handicapped by the knowledge that the ruling ministry in Karnataka is a coalition between the Janata Dal (Secular) and the Congress. They can scarcely attack each other. All they can do is flay the BJP in the name of upholding “secular values” — something that lacks punch when asked why they don’t unite against “communal forces” in that case.There has been no little speculation about the effect that rebel candidates shall have on the assembly polls in neighbouring Maharashtra. But the real story is the manner in which the partners in the nominal “alliance” are battling it out openly in Bidar. Because this, not Maharashtra, could be the fight that sets the mould for future political contests — farces where foes unite to form governments and then split up to decide who gets the larger share in the future divisions of spoils.The contest in Maharashtra stands out as rather disciplined. The Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party are partners both in Mumbai and in Delhi (as are the BJP and the Shiv Sena). There is no constituency where allies are actually opposing each other as is happening in Bidar. But what we are seeing there is the pattern that is bound to be repeated elsewhere — in Kerala, in West Bengal, and so on. Parties — whether in an honest coalition or under the guise of offering “support from outside” — shall demand a share of power but refuse to concede any territory. No principles are at stake, merely power.I think this formula was first suggested by V.P. Singh half a decade ago as the only way to halt the BJP in its tracks. He was attacked by many who thought his stratagem was fundamentally dishonest, a fraud being perpetrated — and perpetuated — on the electors of India. But the dishonesty of yesterday has become the accepted practice of today.Everybody in Karnataka knows that Deve Gowda’s Janata Dal (Secular) voted in favour of the United Progressive Alliance ministry when Dr Manmohan Singh demanded a vote of confidence. Just as everybody in Kerala and West Bengal knew that the Left Front had already offered to support Sonia Gandhi as prime minister before a single vote was cast in the last General Election. But everybody also went through with the whole farce of voting.The current ministry in Karnataka was born with the sole purpose of keeping the BJP away from power. But the glue of secularism is obviously less powerful than the loosening agent of power. How else can you explain the phenomenon called Bidar?
