6 min readNew DelhiMay 13, 2023 07:39 PM IST
First published on: May 13, 2023 at 07:39 PM IST
Some political and electoral traditions rarely change. The Karnataka Assembly elections are a classic example. Voters in the state continued the four-decade-old tradition of never giving the ruling party a majority in the next elections. The defeat of the ruling BJP and the victory of Congress continue this trend. Why didn’t Karnataka voters favour the incumbent? It could well be because of its non-performance, frequent leadership changes and/or political instability. In the last quarter century, only two chief ministers have served their full terms (S M Krishna from 1999-2004 — though he dissolved the Assembly before the end of its term — and Siddaramaiah from 2013-2018). Between 2004 and 2008, 2008 and 2013 and again between 2018-2023, the state had three CMs.
What were the visible signs of anti-incumbency against the state BJP government?
The 2018 Assembly elections gave no party a clear majority. The JDS and Congress cobbled together a coalition to come to power (and keep the BJP out). The coalition government collapsed after a year. It lost its majority after legislators from JDS and Congress resigned. The BJP formed the government and the MLAs who had resigned joined the party. Most of them won their by-elections, giving a majority to the BJP. B S Yediyurappa headed this government for the first two years. It was a very different Yediyurappa who returned to power. Much of the decision making was by the central leadership of the party — the chief minister was saddled with three deputy CMs. The choice and portfolios of ministers and major decisions of the government were not in his hands. One saw an increasingly fatigued Yediyurappa leading the government and it was not difficult for the central leadership to convince him to resign after two years. He had already crossed the age limit that had been prescribed by the BJP for occupying positions when he took over as CM in 2019. An exception was made in his case.
Basavaraj Bommai was handpicked by the central leadership and endorsed by Yediyurappa as his successor. He was leading a ministry in which more than a quarter of his ministers were those who had crossed over to the BJP after the collapse of the JDS-Congress government. Bommai’s two years in power continued to see the directionlessness that had marked his predecessor’s chief ministership. Bommai was not able to expand his ministry, fearing that there would be many more dissatisfied with the expansion than those accommodated as ministers. The promise of an expansion continued till a few months before the elections.
It must also be noted that over the last six months of the BJP government, the party faced a series of embarrassments. The Congress criticised the CM for leading a “40 per cent commission government”. The BJP government was not able to vigorously or satisfactorily respond to the charge. The son of one of its MLAs was caught taking a bribe by the Lokayukta and unaccounted wealth was found in the legislator’s home. The BJP chose not to take any action against the MLA. An immediate suspension from the party would have sent a strong message. The Amul-Nandini controversy also did little to buttress the image of the government. The flip-flop on caste reservation and the embarrassment the government faced in the Supreme Court further dented its image. It was with this “baggage of embarrassment” that the BJP faced the state elections.
In the election, the BJP’s strategy was almost exclusively reliant on the central government and leadership. State leaders (save Yediyurappa) and the state government rarely figured in its campaign. On the other hand, Congress made the perceived non-performance of the state government its core agenda. This put the state government and the BJP on the defensive. The Lokniti-CSDS survey done during the campaign indicated that the state government was quite unpopular and a majority preferred to not give it another chance.
Another factor that queered the pitch for the BJP was its denial of re-nomination to many of its sitting MLAs. While the party has done this in the past in other states, the move evoked a strong response in Karnataka. A former CM and deputy CM left the party to join the Congress and contested the elections (one was defeated and one was elected). They, incidentally, hailed from the dominant Lingayat community, which was a major caste group that supported the BJP. While the BJP appears to have retained a large chunk of the Lingayat vote, the “political optics” that the rebellion resulted in dented the image of the state government and the party.
As the election results came trickling in, it became evident that the unpopularity of the state government and its perceived non-performance has badly hit the BJP, especially in three regions of the state — Kalyana Karnataka (also called Hyderabad Karnataka), Kittur Karnataka ( also called Mumbai Karnataka) and the Old Mysore region. This, coupled with the erosion of the vote base of the Janata Dal (S), especially in the Old Mysore region, contributed to the Congress victory. The Congress won riding on a negative vote of unhappiness with the state government. In its time in power, it would be interesting to see if it consolidates this vote through its governance or fritters away an opportunity on account of infighting and indecisiveness.
The writer, a political analyst, is the national coordinator of Lokniti Network
"It must also be noted that over the last six months of the BJP government, the party faced a series of embarrassments," writes Sandeep Shastri. (Twitter/ BSBommai) 
Share
