INSTITUTE
New Rules for Indian Politics?
Dr. Milan Vaishnav,
Associate, South Asia Program,
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
June 17, 2015
www.idfcinstitute.org
facebook.com/idfcinstitute
twitter.com/idfcinstitute
We’re also on
New Rules for Indian Politics?
Milan Vaishnav | June 17, 2015
Was 2014 a game-changer?
Source: @bhuvanthaker
2014 elections by the numbers
8,251 candidates
464 political parties
554 million voters
Estimated $5 billion in campaign
expenditures
First single-party majority since 1984
Source: Vaishnav and Smogard (2014)
“Tsu-NaMo”
Reversal of personal fortune
40
37
34
Preference for PM (%)
35
30
25
19
20
15
19
Modi
15
15
Mar/14
May/14
12
10
6
5
5
2
0
2009
Source: CSDS Post-Poll
2011
Jul/13
Rahul
The Indian voter in 2015
Source: Indian Express
1. BJP as new “pole”
National-regional equilibrium
Source: Vaishnav and Smogard (2014)
A new central “pole”
Source: Press Information Bureau
Congress on the decline
(Suit)-boots on the ground
Who controls the states?
2. Moving towards
“It’s the economy, stupid”
“It’s the economy, stupid!”
Triumph of parochialism
A cautionary tale?
“India has not reached a stage where the people would prefer a
CEO to a politician to run the government.”
-- K.C. Suri (2004)
Good economics ≠ good politics
Source: Vaishnav and Swanson (2015)
Are things changing?
“Since independence, many Indian voters have
reflexively ejected politicians from office even
when they had compiled decent records in
power…Recently, though, Indian voters have
started to reward good performance, especially
in state-level politics.”
- Arvind Subramanian (2009)
2009 Lok Sabha elections
Source: Gupta and Panagariya (2014)
Good economics ≠ good politics
Source: Vaishnav and Swanson (2013)
Post-2000s shift
Source: Vaishnav and Swanson (2013)
Most important issue in 2014?
rural
urban
0.3
Share or respondents
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
Economic Corruption Inflation
Growth
Source: Lok Foundation (2014)
Personal
Income
Law and
Order
Access
Strong
Identity
Govt Leadership
Benefits
2014 NES post-poll
Single most important issue (%)
20
19
18
16
14
11.6
12
10.9
10
7.5
8
6
4.6
4
2
0
Price rise
Source: CSDS (2014)
Corruption
Lack of
development
Employment
Govt has done
development
3. Messy realities of ethnic voting
% of respondents demonstrating “bias”
Social biases: positive & negative
50%
46%
45%
40%
36%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Co-ethnic affinity
Source: Authors’ calculations based on Lok Foundation data
Ethnic bias
2014 BJP performance in north India
70
65
BJP vote share (%)
60
55
48
50
45
40
34
30
20
11
10
0
Upper Caste
Source: CSDS (2014)
OBC
SC
ST
Social Group
Muslims
Others
“Rainbow coalitions” (Bihar 2010)
Social group
Upper
Caste
OBC
SC
Minorities
Source: CSDS (2010)
Brahmin
Bhumihar
Rajput
Other Upper Caste
Yadav
Kurmi-Koeri
Other OBC
Chamars
Pasi
Other SC
Muslim
Others
% vote for NDA
64
48
68
89
18
70
63
41
25
52
27
47
Degree of co-ethnic voting
100%
85.9%
90%
80%
70%
60.8%
60%
50%
39.2%
40%
30%
20%
14.2%
10%
0%
Coethnic
Source: Vaishnav (2014)
Group co-ethnic
Yes
No
Can voters ethnically identify
candidates?
80%
70.8%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
29.2%
20%
10%
0%
Misidentified
Source: Vaishnav (2014)
Correctly Identified
4. More choices, same options
Source: ECI
2014
2009
2004
1999
1998
1996
1991
1989
1984
1980
1977
1971
1967
1962
1957
1952
Number of political parties
Surge in political competition
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Dynasticism among MPs
2004
20%
80%
21%
29%
71%
Dynastic ties
Source: Chandra (2014)
2014
2009
79%
No dynastic ties
“Princelings” in parliament
100
90
80
Percent (%)
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Parties with 5+ Lok Sabha seats
Source: The Hindu (2014)
AIADMK
BJP
AITC
Shiv Sena
CPI(M)
TRS
BJD
INC
TDP
YSRCP
LJP
NCP
SP
0
State-level dynasties
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Abdullahs(NC, Jammu& Kashmir)
Badals(SAD, Punjab)
Karunanidhis (DMK, Tamil Nadu)
Hoodas (INC, Haryana)
Paswans(LJP, Bihar)
Patnaiks (BJP, Odisha)
Pawars (NCP, Maharashtra)
Reddys (YSRCP, AP)
Scindias (INC/BJP, Rajasthan/MP)
Thackerays (ShivSena, Maharashtra)
Yadavs(RJD, Bihar)
Yadavs (SP, UP)
Hereditary MPs (by age)
100%
90%
80%
Percent
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Under 30
30-39
40-49
50-59
Age cohort
Source: The Hindu (2014); French (2010)
60-69
70-79
80 and up
Law-breakers & law-makers?
MPs with criminal cases
MPs with serious cases
Percentage of Lok Sabha MPs
40%
34%
35%
30%
30%
25%
24%
21%
20%
15%
15%
12%
10%
5%
0%
2004
Source: Author’s calculations based on ADR data
2009
Lok Sabha Election Year
2014
Par for the course
% Cases
% Serious cases
40
35
35
% Lok Sabha MPs
30
25
22
21
18
20
16
15
15
12
10
7
8
10
5
0
BJP
Source: Author’s calculations based on ADR data
INC
AIADMK
AITC
BJD
Male-female turnout convergence
Female representation is (slowly)
growing
Candidates (%)
Winners (%)
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
2014
2009
2004
1999
1998
1996
1991
1989
1984
1980
1977
1971
1967
1962
1957
0%
Conclusion
• Regionalization has stalled; BJP has become
“central pole”
– Blessing and a curse
• Aspirations of voters have changed, yet
quality of candidates on offer has not
• Social biases remain entrenched even though
their expression might be changing
INSTITUTE
Our next discussion….
Fundamental reform in Indian finance
Dr. Ajay Shah
Head of the Macro/Finance Group at the National Institute of Public Finance and Policy
July 6, 2015
www.idfcinstitute.org
facebook.com/idfcinstitute
twitter.com/idfcinstitute
We’re also on