THE TWO SIDES TO ONE POLL

ADVANTAGES

Ends a staggered electoral cycle where there is an average of more than five state elections every year overburdening parties and the electoral machinery

Cuts back rising election costs, and recurring deployment of administrative personnel as polling staff

Reduces the use of security resources/ police personnel for peaceful conduct of polls

Enforces the Model Code of Conduct, which suspends administrative activity and stalls routine governance, for a smaller period of time instead of allowing it to kick in over general electoral cycles

Fewer elections help curb corruption and reduce the number of conduits and flow of black money

Reduces the number of disruptions in the governance process

DISADVANTAGES

Stifles diversity and coalition politics that add to the vibrancy of a democracy, which, in turn, impacts voter behaviour and electoral outcomes

Neutralises anti–incumbency in the states if there is a majoritarian government at the Centre, making the Centre-state relationship one of master and client

Diminishes the role of regional parties

Curtails the legislature’s powers to unseat a government as no Opposition would be able to table a no-confidence motion unless it has the capacity to also simultaneously form a new government

Undermines the spirit of federalism; tinkers with many basic principles that the Constitution upholds

Blurs the distinguishing features of the political discourse on national and local issues, which should ideally remain distinct

Impacts the poor by diminishing the only power they have—the right to vote

Diverts attention from more pressing issues of electoral reform, particularly the flaws of proportional representation