Delhi results: Rise of the impatient voter

The impressive victory of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in Delhi Assembly polls may have a significant impact on the manner in which the BJP and Congress deal with their own electoral promises.

Poll promises ideally should ensure that every consecutive vote is in favour of an incremental and steady reform of the democratic system so that it is deepened and becomes more meaningful. Within this, the inevitable negative or positive vote might decide leadership, and populism could represent the aspirations of the marginalised sections.

This, however, is not what happened in the recent Delhi elections, where further advantages have been promised to people of arguably one of the best cities of the country. Political parties cannot be faulted for identifying voter-vulnerabilities, however valid or invalid, and using them to for electoral gains. That was what the Congress-led UPA had done in 2004 and 2009 Lok Sabha elections and the party got 10 years in power to keep the promises they made. During most of that period, the Congress had also returned to power in the state government in Delhi, which being the national capital closely assesses policy and people in power. This was demonstrated when Congress lost in Delhi before being defeated in the 2014 Lok Sabha election. At that time, the aspirations of Delhi seemed to be aligned with the aspirations of Narendra Modi. That it should have taken less than 10 months for the same voters to finda new realignment with AAP is a matter of concern. As a trend, this would only make politicians more insecure and governments more arbitrary.

The baggage of promises made in the past forces national parties to tread cautiously on the path of quick-fix remedies. Today, when a single mobile phone can improve the memory of a voter, it is getting tough to escape the debris of broken promises. Populist campaigns lead to an escalation of unrealistic commitments from rivals that are easier to make for regional parties than national parties. The political economy of such competitive populism could derail the national agenda of the BJP and Congress. Also, if national parties offer such sops in one state to counter a regional party, they might find it difficult to deny the same to other states.

To be fair to AAP, they had to count on their promises to capture voters' imagination in the absence of candidates' track record or party performance. But the "free" promises of AAP had weighed heavier with the voters than the need for patience with the BJP government. It was difficult to match cheap electricity, free water, free Wi-Fi, cheap groceries, VAT restructuring and, a mobile phone button to call the police. Andin such innocuous corners, perhaps, hide the reasons for landslides.

History has interesting lessons on this issue, which nevertheless have been often forgotten and, therefore, often repeated. When Janata Party swept the 1977 Lok Sabha elections and subsequently reduced Congress to rule in just a few states, it would have been difficult to imagine that the government would crumble so soon afterwards. The Congress debacle in 1996 was because economic reforms, although delivered, did not bring about the promised better life to the man on the street. The BJP defeat in 2004 was because despite positive growth, it was not perceived as being inclusive.

The trend seems to be similar in states. In the 2004 Assembly elections in Andhra Pradesh, the Telugu Desam Party despite the transformation of cities like Hyderabad lost because of failed promises on rural development. In the 2007 Assembly elections in Punjab, just three years after the victory in 2004, the Congress lost because it failed to keep its promise to reduce food inflation. Price rise, beside cheap power and water, happens to be the most favoured promise of political parties for swaying the electorate. It may also be one of the most frequent promises to be broken once political parties come to power.

The UPA II lost the election because people ran out of patience eventually. The Delhi verdict might by an indication to Modi that those days of a patient voter are a thing of past. And for AAP, "Paanch saal Kejriwal" may be too much to ask.