08 November 2013, 05:15 PM IST
An enduring myth is that the Congress "won" the 2004 Lok Sabha election. Did it really? Consider the facts closely. The Congress won 145 seats in 2004 – barely four more than it had won in 1998 (141 seats) when it was defeated by the Vajpayee-led BJP.
More significantly, in 2004, the Congress won just seven seats more than the BJP (138). Had it not been for the Left Front which gave it outside support with its block of 60 seats, there would have been no UPA-1 – and perhaps none of UPA-1's scams: 2G spectrum, Coalgate, Commonweath Games, AgustaWestland, Scorpene, etc.
Ironically, 2004 was a Left project and the Left has not yet been held to account for its lax surveillance of UPA-1's scams during its coordination meetings to monitor the Common Minimum Programme (CMP) on which the Congress-Left alliance was based.
How about 2009? Was the Congress' victory with 206 seats a blip? How will the Congress do in 2014?
An examination of the Congress' seat tally and voteshare in the last five general elections from 1996 to 2009 throws up interesting clues.
| Congress seats and voteshare (1996-2009) | ||
|
| Seats | Voteshare (%) |
| 1996 | 140 | 28.80 |
| 1998 | 141 | 25.82 |
| 1999 | 114 | 28.30 |
| 2004 | 145 | 26.53 |
| 2009 | 206 | 28.55 |
The startling conclusion: In the four general elections between 1996 and 2004, the Congress won 145 seats or less in each of these Lok Sabha polls. Its average tally in the four general election from 1996-2004: 135 seats.
Now consider 2009. The Congress tally jumped to 206 seats. What made the difference?
The short answer: Manmohan Singh, in his pre-scam avatar.
The urban middle-class, on the cusp of five years of 8%-plus GDP growth, placed its trust in his leadership. The Congress won a large number of the country's 160 urban Lok Sabha seats. The Mumbai terror attack on November 26, 2008 and the Lehman Brothers collapse on September 15, 2008 only served to consolidate the middle-class vote behind the Congress.
In 1996, 1998, 1999 and 2004, the Congress averaged 135 Lok Sabha seats. So the 206 seats it won in 2009 was clearly a blip. With the urban vote turning viscerally against UPA-2 following scams, inflation and damage to institutions such as CAG, CVC and even the PMO, the Congress' seat tally in 2014 should logically fall to its trendline average between 1996 and 2004, viz around 135.
But here too there are three new factors at work: severe anti-incumbency due to corruption and inflation; disruption in Andhra Pradesh; and Narendra Modi's rise.
Put together, these factors could take the Congress all the way back to its 1999 tally of 114 Lok Sabha seats – and perhaps considerably lower.
Without the 33 seats it won in Andhra in 2009, given the uncertain fate of Telangana, and trouble brewing in Kerala, only Maharashtra and Karnataka are likely to give the Congress more than 10 seats each. If its Lok Sabha tally in 2014 falls to 100 seats, that will be 35 seats lower than its 1996-2004 average of 135. Plausible? If the Congress could exceed the 135-seat average in 2009 by 71 seats, a fall of 35 seats to 100 in 2014 is statistically plausible.
More worryingly for the Congress, will 100 be its new long-term trendline average in the Lok Sabha, down from its 1996-2004 average of 135?
Jairam Ramesh said recently that he's "frustrated" with Rahul because his thinking is too long-term. Rahul is more realistic than Jairam. His family has a stake in the Congress and as a stakeholder knows when the tide is turning. Long-term recovery for the Congress, Rahul knows, is a long-term project.
But before that happens, the party will have to undergo a transformation, shedding its dynastic trappings to become a professional, modern and democratic party.
Follow @minhazmerchant on twitter
Anda sedang membaca artikel tentang
Congress: Why 2004 was a false dawn
Dengan url
http://osteoporosista.blogspot.com/2013/11/congress-why-2004-was-false-dawn.html
Anda boleh menyebar luaskannya atau mengcopy paste-nya
Congress: Why 2004 was a false dawn
namun jangan lupa untuk meletakkan link
Congress: Why 2004 was a false dawn
sebagai sumbernya
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar