Re: [IAC#RG] ACTION: This fraud called "elections"

Dear Ms. Natarajan

1) At present citizens vote "FOR " (ie. +1) a candidate who may be
from a party or an independent.

2) In 2003-2004 the Election Commission, concerned with
criminalisation of politics and role of black money, solicited views
from the public concerning how to tackle this menace.

3) Two popular proposals received were

a) "None of the above" (NOTA) in which the voter records that he does
not repose faith in any of the candidates to represent him. This is
simply a meaningless rejection of the electoral process itself and the
vote is not even counted. The 2 big Political parties have started a
disinformation campaign to promote NOTA because it is status quo-ist
and shall keep a section of the public fooled/quiet.

b) Negative Vote. In this the voter casts his vote AGAINST (-1) a
particular candidate. This is pure democracy in action. The citizen
is not concerned who the other candidates are, he vetos Mr. X or Party
X whom he actively REJECTS. The 2 Big political parties despise this
option because it directly targets them for non-performance,
corruption etc. This was being very seriously considered in 2004
because 1,200 eminent citizens filed their individual representations
to the Commission asking for this under the existing Act and Rules.
But, as always, the then CEC one Mr.T.S.Krishnamurthy, a pliable
political appointee, mischievously concatenated the Negative Voting
concept with the NOTA proposal to pass them off as one and the same
thing.

Now to the legality and implementability of the Negative Voting system.

1) The present law allows it. The Rules (which are executive things)
"may" have to be modified to implement it.
2) The EVMs (voting machines) can be easily programmed to carry out
Negative voting.

As Ld. Shanti Bhushan ji has mentioned, NOTA already exists but is
meaningless. Negative Voting simply needs an additional Rule which any
babu can do. What we need now is the critical mass to make this
concept understood, because there will be very powerful forces opposed
to it and who will use every trick to prevent it like they did the
LokPal Bill.

Sarbajit

On 3/7/13, Natarajan <natarajan218@yahoo.com> wrote:
> This whole business of positive and negative votes is too cumbersome and
> difficult to comprehend and even more difficult to implement. Crooks can
> beat the system We should instead have a system of voting only for parties
> and not individual candidates.. Parties should compete on the strength of
> their manifesto and an announced list of credible, clean potential ministers
> in the order of merit as they themselves see them. The public can vote
> knowing what type of persons will wield power as ministers. This will make
> the parties more responsible and transparent. The public can reject parties
> with dubious leaders. Finally you have to trust the voting public. we need
> to remember that even a squeaky clean person like our PM and Defence
> minister can look the other way when corruption takes place under their own
> nose. Some like Laloo have become corrupt even after neing followers of
> Jaiprakash narain! no one can guarantee 100% satisfaction
>
>
> With regards
>
> N.Natarajan