Opinion Political funding needs an IPL model
The issue is not a lack of means of funding but the monopolisation of funding and a quid pro quo with the ruling party. One solution can be corporates donating to a trust managed by a constitutional body which then distributes it in proportion to seats contested by each party or some such transparent measure
India’s elections may be free (people are free to vote), but are certainly not fair. The current skew in election funding is unsustainable, and it is only a matter of time before opposition parties throw in the towel and withdraw from such grossly unfair elections. If the Mumbai Indians had 10 times more money than the other IPL teams, it would help them buy better players, train better and provide better facilities. Naturally, this would help them win the IPL more often. Would the IPL then be deemed fair, competitive or even interesting for viewers? Obviously not. The IPL has explicit rules to ensure financial parity, and all teams have the same amount of money, so they compete only on talent and merit. This is how most of the big sports leagues in the world operate.
If sports leagues can understand the importance of a “level financial playing field” and enforce rules, shouldn’t democratic politics that shapes the lives and livelihoods of millions of people be even more rigorous and strict in ensuring financial parity for all political parties?
The BJP has 12 times more money than its nearest rival, Congress. Of all the corporate donations to political parties in 2024-25, the BJP got more than 75 per cent of the money while a dozen other parties combined got only 25 per cent. The “Indian Election League” is the most skewed, most unfair and least competitive election league of all democracies in the world.
Money drives modern-day politics. The ability to set a strong narrative, communicate to the masses through “viral WhatsApp” messages and dominate social media chatter through “influencers” is a direct function of the amount of money one spends on these, not some secret sauce that the BJP has and other parties don’t.
Much is made out of the “election machine” of the ruling BJP with its “panna pramukhs”, booth agents and door-to-door canvassers. Cut out the monthly payment to these armies of people and you will see how this supposedly efficient machine breaks down instantly. A typical BJP candidate in an election has 10 times more money than his rival, which helps him deploy more people, more posters, more “influencers” in that constituency. In many cases, the rival candidate is so daunted by the scale of the BJP candidate’s efforts that he thinks it’s wiser to pocket his share of election expenses and let the BJP candidate win anyway.
The BJP seeks to exploit every plausible opportunity to accumulate more money for itself, from the dubious PMCARES fund collection drives during Covid to threatening corporates with ED, CBI and IT raids for funds. Further, it is no secret that the ruling BJP puts enormous pressure on donors not to donate to rival parties, especially Congress.
While money has played a vital role in all democracies through history, it is now the only edifice of the BJP’s politics. Ideology, vision, and leadership charisma are all mere embellishments on top. Remove money, and it all comes crumbling down.
If Narendra Modi is still the charismatic vote-puller or the BJP/RSS’s Hindutva vision has hundreds of millions of ardent supporters or lakhs of “swayamsevak” volunteers have devoted their lives to the BJP’s cause for no reward, then why does the BJP need 75 per cent of all corporate donations to win elections? After all, if a team has more talented players, a better strategy and a huge army of volunteer support staff, it should win on a level playing field with other teams and not need enormously more money than its competitors.
State funding of elections as an alternative advocated by Communist parties is untenable for the size and scale of India’s politics. The issue is not a lack of means of funding but the monopolisation of funding and a quid pro quo with the ruling party. A “blind pool” framework of electoral funding can be a solution where corporates donate to a trust managed by a constitutional body that then distributes the funds in proportion to the seats contested by each party or some such transparent measure. The “blind” aspect is necessary to avoid quid-pro-quo corruption, and a centrally managed pool with a well-publicised allocation formula would ensure financial parity for all parties.
India’s elections may be free (people are free to vote), but are certainly not fair. The current skew in election funding is unsustainable, and it is only a matter of time before opposition parties throw in the towel and withdraw from such grossly unfair elections. Let Indian politics learn from Indian cricket.
The writer is chairman, Professionals’ Congress & chairman, Data Analytics of the Congress
Share
