The arithmetic of population logic

Avote in the great state of Uttar Pradesh carries less weight in a general election than a vote in Tamil Nadu. It’s simple arithmetic: UP’s 22 crore people send 80 MPs to the Lok Sabha. Tamil Nadu, with a third of the population, has almost half as many MPs (39). Similarly, Kerala has a sixth of UP’s population but one-fourth as many seats.

The founding fathers envisaged equal weightage for every vote. If that criteria were applied, the share of the four southern states and one union territory in the Lok Sabha would fall. To prevent the political disempowerment of the South, the number of Lok Sabha seats in each state was frozen in 1976, through the 42nd constitutional amendment.

That decision, taken during the Emergency, was subsequently endorsed in 2000 and again in 2002. Until 2026, the political map of India stands frozen. The discrepancy in representation is evident from the fact that the country’s largest Lok Sabha constituency in 2014 had nearly three million voters, while the smallest had less than 50,000.

In terms of population, the South’s share has declined by almost four per cent since 1972, the last time Lok Sabha constituencies were delimited state-wise. But, at least until 2026, it will continue to enjoy a 24 per cent share in the Lok Sabha. It will not be politically disempowered, any more than it was in 1972.

By that same token, can the South be economically disempowered? Linking share of union tax revenue to the current population of each state, rather than that of 1971 (when delimitation was frozen), will cost the states of Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Andhra, Telengana and Karnataka heavily. After all, they have a larger share of the “grey” population to look after.

The chief ministers of Kerala, Karnataka, Andhra and Puducherry have come out strongly against the terms of reference of the 15th Finance Commission for devolution of funds to states. At a conclave held in Kerala this week, the finance ministers of the South (minus Tamil Nadu and Telengana) held that population-linked funding would undermine the spirit of federalism.

In effect, successful family planning and education programmes which have resulted in low fertility rates and a superior human development index would boomerang on the South. Previous finance commissions have gone by the 1971 census, so the question of why the ground rules have changed is valid. The 14th Finance Commission gave a weightage of 10 per cent to population figures, based on the 2011 census.

Estimates on just how much the South will lose vis-a-vis the North vary, but there’s no doubt that it will be badly hit. Even the 10 per cent population weightage criteria used by the 14th Finance Commission is believed to have cost Tamil Nadu Rs 6,000 crore. From the perspective of the South, it may appear that the North is using a demographic club to corner a larger share.

One argument that has been put forward in favour of population-linked funding of states, is that no citizen should be penalised for having been born in a “disadvantaged” region. Everyone is entitled to “basic minimum services”.

That same egalitarian logic can be applied to Lutyens’ Delhi (NDMC area) which has a population of 2.57 lakh (2011 census) and a budget of almost Rs 4,000 crore. The East Delhi Municipal Corporation has a budget of Rs 5,200 crore and a population of 1.7 million. The imperative of “basic minimum services” clearly does not apply here. Needless to say, the economists, who put forward the egalitarian argument, do not live in East Delhi.

Prima facie, dis-incentivising population control in a time of overpopulation, shrinking resources and climate change, makes little sense. It also smacks of an unfair use of political clout. Indeed, Kerala CM Pinarayi Vijayan saw a ‘conspicuous bias’ in the 15th Finance Commission.

However, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley observed that the inclusion of ‘efforts and progress made in moving towards replacement rate of population growth’ in the terms of reference, will allow the 15th Finance Commission to reward the progressive states.

It is tempting to dismiss the dissonance in the southern states as being politically motivated, especially in an election year. But the fact is that the South has achieved superior human development indicators through enlightened leadership, notably in Tamil Nadu, where Periyar advocated a higher age at marriage and education for women as well as smaller families.

Certainly, narrowing the gap between South and North is desirable because regional socio-economic disparities inevitably lead to political unrest. But it cannot be achieved by applying the “crab” logic, that is, pulling down the enterprising crab which seeks to crawl up and out of the prison.

Further, to apply the population logic to the share of union taxes, when it is not applied to the electoral rolls, is a contradiction. Adequate weightage must be given to population stabilisation measures, as Arun Jaitley has said, so that the South does not suffer.

The writer is a senior journalist with 35 years of experience in working with major newspapers and magazines. She is now an independent writer and author.

It is tempting to dismiss the dissonance in the southern states as being politically motivated, especially in an election year. But the fact is that the South has achieved superior human development indicators through enlightened leadership, notably in Tamil Nadu, where Periyar advocated a higher age at marriage and education for women as well as smaller families.