Indian Youth and Electoral Politics: An Emerging Engagement 9788132117766

Citation preview

Indian Youth and Electoral Politics

Thank you for choosing a SAGE product! If you have any comment, observation or feedback, I would like to personally hear from you. Please write to me at [email protected] —Vivek Mehra, Managing Director and CEO, SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd, New Delhi

Bulk Sales SAGE India offers special discounts for purchase of books in bulk. We also make available special imprints and excerpts from our books on demand. For orders and enquiries, write to us at Marketing Department SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd B1/I-1, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area Mathura Road, Post Bag 7 New Delhi 110044, India E-mail us at [email protected]

Get to know more about SAGE, be invited to SAGE events, get on our mailing list. Write today to [email protected]

This book is also available as an e-book.

YZ

Indian Youth and Electoral Politics AN

E M ER G IN G

E N G A GE M E NT

Edited by Sanjay Kumar

Copyright © Sanjay Kumar, 2014 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. First published in 2014 by SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd B1/I-1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area Mathura Road, New Delhi 110 044, India www.sagepub.in SAGE Publications Inc 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, California 91320, USA SAGE Publications Ltd 1 Oliver’s Yard, 55 City Road London EC1Y 1SP, United Kingdom SAGE Publications Asia-Paciϐic Pte Ltd 3 Church Street #10-04 Samsung Hub Singapore 049483 Published by Vivek Mehra for SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd, Phototypeset in 10.5/12.5 Cambria by RECTO Graphics, Delhi, and printed at Saurabh Printers Pvt Ltd, New Delhi. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Available

ISBN: 978-81-321-1776-6 (PB) The SAGE Team: Shambhu Sahu, Shreya Chakraborti, Rajib Chatterjee and Rajinder Kaur

Contents

List of Illustrations Preface Acknowledgments Introduction 1. Awareness on Political Issues Vibha Attri

vii xv xix xxi 1

2. Interest in Politics and Political Participation Kinjal Sampat and Jyoti Mishra

18

3. The Voting Pattern Sanjay Kumar

47

4. Young Candidates and Young Voters Jyoti Mishra

63

5. Issues of Electoral Reforms Shreyas Sardesai

78

6. Politics as a Career: Perception and Choice Sanjay Kumar

114

Appendix I Survey Questionnaire: Youth and Politics Survey 2011

133

Appendix II 141 Who Were Interviewed during the Survey: The Social Profile Appendix III Opinion and Attitudes: The Basic Findings

151

About the Editor and Contributors

179

Index

181

List of Illustrations

Tables 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9

1.10 1.11 1.12 1.13

About One-third of Indian Youth Politically Unaware About Political Events, Youth More Aware Compared to Others Political Awareness Higher among Young Men Compared to Young Women Rural Youth Less Aware Compared to Urban Youth Even with Similar Level of Education, Urban Youth More Aware Compared to Rural Youth Awareness among Youth Increases with Increase in Level of Media Exposure Rural Youth with High Media Exposure More Aware about Political Issues Upper-class Youth Most Aware, Poor Youth Least Aware about Political Events Urban, Educated, Upper Class, and Youth with High Media Exposure, More Aware about Political Events Nonliterate, Poor, and Youth Unexposed to Media Are Politically Least Aware Compared to Others, Youth More Familiar with Names of MP and MLA Youth Interested in Politics More Aware Youth Who Value Their Vote More Aware about Political Events

3 3 4 5 5 6 7 7 8

9 9 10 10

viii Indian Youth and Electoral Politics

1.14 Frequent Discussions about Political Events More amongst the Youth Compared to Others 1.15 College Educated, Youth with High Media Exposure and Upper-class Youth More Active in Political Discussion 1.16 More Discussion of Politics by Young Men Compared to Young Women 1.17 Compared to Others, Youth More Active in Discussions on Political Institutions 1.18 About Every Political Institution, the Youth Discuss More Compared to Others 1.19 Compared to Young Women of Similar Level of Education, Young Men Discuss Political Institutions More 1.20 Upper-class Youth with High Media Exposure Discuss Political Institutions the Most

11

2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4

22 22 22 23

2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10 2.11 2.12 2.13

Level of Political Interest among Youth Youth More Interested in Politics Interest in Politics on the Rise among Youth Compared to Young Women, More Young Men Interested in Politics Support Increasing for the Idea “Politics is not meant for women” Political Interest Rises with Education, among Both Young Men and Women Interest in Politics Similar among Collegeeducated Youth across Localities Interest in Politics and Discussions on Politics Members of Political Parties Show Maximum Interest in Politics Turnout among Different Age Groups over the Years Turnout among Young Men More Compared to Young Women Turnout among Rural Youth More Compared to Urban Youth Main Reasons for Not Voting (2009)

11

12 13 13 14

14

24 25 26 27 27 29 31 31 32

List of Illustrations

2.14 Less the Belief in Vote’s Efficacy, Less the Urge to Vote 2.15 Sizeable Number of Youth Participate in Electoral Activities 2.16 Electoral Participation of Youth Marginally Higher 2.17 Electoral Participation of Youth Rising Steadily 2.18 Interest in Politics Higher among Rural Youth Compared to Urban Youth 2.19 Participation in Electoral Activities More among Rural Youth 2.20 Irrespective of Education, Electoral Participation Low among Young Women Compared to Young Men 2.21 Electoral Participation More among Educated Rural Youth Compared to Educated Urban Youth 2.22 Media Exposure Has a Positive Impact on Interest in Politics and Electoral Participation 2.23 Members of Student and Youth Wings Not Very Participative in Electoral Activities 2.24 Participation in Protests Low, among Both Youth and Others 2.25 Participation in Protests Higher among Young Men Compared to Young Women 2.26 Greater the Exposure to Media, Higher the Participation in Protests 2.27 Higher the Level of Education Attainment, Higher the Participation in Protests 2.28 Greater the Interest in Politics, Greater the Participation in Protests and Demonstrations 2.29 Participation in Protests Highest among Political Party and Union Members 2.30 Higher the Participation in Electoral Activities, Higher the Participation in Protests 3.1

Hardly an Advantage for Any Political Party amongst Young Voters

ix

33 33 34 34 35 36 37

38 38 39 40 40 41 41 42 42 43

50

x Indian Youth and Electoral Politics

3.2

Congress Has Enjoyed an Advantage over BJP amongst Young Women Voters, but Not amongst Young Men Voters 3.3 More Young Women Voted for the Congress 3.4 BJP’s Vote Share Has Declined amongst Urban Youth 3.5 Congress Has an Advantage over the BJP amongst Uneducated Youth 3.6 BJP’s Vote Share Has Declined Sharply amongst Educated Youth 3.7 BJP Has Lost Its Vote Bank More amongst College-educated Youth Compared to College-educated Others 3.8 Upper-caste Youth Voted for BJP but the Party Has Been Losing Popularity 3.9 The Divided OBC Young Voters 3.10 A Remarkable Shift amongst Young Dalit Voters toward BSP 3.11 The Adivasi Vote for the BJP: Young and Others 3.12 The Adivasi Vote for the Congress: Young and Others 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7

4.8

Candidate’s Work the Most Important Consideration for Youth Youth and Old Prefer Young Leader Young Leaders Better for Development Young Leaders Can Govern Better than Other Leaders Support for Young Leaders More among Youth Compared to Others Support for Young Leaders Most among Women Moderately Exposed to Media Support for Young Leaders Most among Youth Who Are Members of Student or Youth Wings of Political Parties Young Leaders Perform Better Due to Their Enthusiasm

51

52 54 55 56 57

58 59 60 61 61

65 65 66 66 67 68 68

69

List of Illustrations

4.9 4.10 4.11 4.12 4.13 4.14

5.1

Young Leaders Are Better Educated and Hence Can Govern Better Young Leaders Better Evaluated by Young Respondents Everyone Not Opposed to Dynasty Politics Young Dynasty Candidate Preferred over Senior Non-dynasty MP Young Dynasty Candidate Finds Support Even among Those Opposed to Dynasty Politics Young Age of Candidate Given Preference over Political Lineage by Youth

High Support for Right to Recall, Particularly among Youth 5.2 Urban Youth More Strongly in Favor of Recall; Rural Youth Not Far Behind 5.3 Youth Strongly Support Recall Even When Satisfied with MP’s Work 5.4 When Satisfied with MLA’s Work, Opposition to Recall Is Higher 5.5 Youth Who Are Low to Moderately Educated Are More Supportive of Recall than the Highly Educated 5.6 Youth with Media Exposure Are More Supportive of Recall than Youth with No Media Exposure 5.7 Voter Turnout in Lok Sabha Elections (1952–2009) 5.8 Voter Turnouts around the World 5.9 Majority in Favor of Compulsory Voting, Youth More So than Others 5.10 Very High Support for Compulsory Voting among Urban Youth 5.11 Among Youth, Higher the Level of Education, More the Support for Compulsory Voting 5.12 Compulsory Voting Finds Supporters Even in Youth Who Did Not Vote in the 2009 Lok Sabha Polls

xi

70 71 72 73 74 75

82 83 83 84 84

85 87 88 91 92 93 93

xii Indian Youth and Electoral Politics

5.13 Compulsory Voting Favored More by Those Who Believe Their Vote Matters 5.14 Those Interested in Politics Favor the Idea of Compulsory Voting 5.15 High Support for Right to Reject, Particularly among Youth 5.16 Urban Areas More in Favor of Right to Reject 5.17 Stronger Opinions among the Educated on Right to Reject 5.18 “Reject” Favored More by Youth Who Voted on Candidate Lines Rather than Party Lines in 2009 5.19 Proportion of Population in Different Age Groups in India 5.20 Proportion of Lok Sabha MPs in Different Age Groups 5.21 Age Profile of Ministers of Union Government in India 5.22 Proportion of Union Ministers in Different Age Groups 5.23 Average Age of Heads of Government in Various Countries 5.24 Moderate Support for Setting an Upper Age Limit for Contesting Elections 5.25 Urban Areas Slightly More in Favor of Fixing an Upper Age Limit for Fighting Elections 5.26 Moderately Educated Youth Most Supportive of Setting an Upper Age Limit for Contesting Elections 5.27 Greater Support for Setting an Upper Age Limit for Fighting Elections among Those Who Feel Young Govern Better than Old 5.28 Right to Recall Gets Highest Approval 5.29 Support for Electoral Reforms, Particularly among Youth 5.30 Urban Areas More Supportive of Electoral Reforms 5.31 Compared to Women, Men Show High Support for Reforms 5.32 Electoral Reforms Supported by Youth from Upper and Middle Classes More than Those from Lower and Poor Classes

94 95 97 98 98 99 100 100 101 102 102 103 104 105 105

106 107 107 108 108

List of Illustrations

xiii

5.33 Young Left Supporters More Skeptical of Electoral Reforms than Young Congress and BJP Supporters

109

6.1

117

6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7

6.8 6.9 6.10 6.11 6.12

6.13

One-third of Indian Youth Willing to Opt for Politics as a Career Urban Youth More Inclined toward a Career in Politics Across Locality, Young Men More Likely to Choose Politics as Career Education Bridges the Rural–Urban Divide Middle-class Youth Most Interested in Politics as Career Interest in Politics Makes Youth More Open to Politics as Career Participation in Election Campaign Activities Has Positive Relationship with Politics as Career Choice Politically Aware Youth More Inclined to Join Politics Youth Who Are Most Likely to Make Politics Their Career Reasons Dissuading Youth from Choosing Politics as Career Increasing Number of Women Contesting Lok Sabha and Assembly Elections Among Young Women with Some Interest in Politics, Education Motivates to Choose Politics as Their Career Most Women Disagree That “Politics is not meant for women”

119 120 120 121 121 122

122 123 124 127 128

129

Figures I.1 I.2

Average Age of MPs Increasing with Time Number of Young MPs Decreasing with Time

xxvi xxvii

Preface

T

he category or the social group referred to as “Indian Youth” may look simple as most of us identify this category by a certain age group, but it is not as simple as one may think. Even the attempt to define the category Indian Youth only by age is contested since there is hardly any consensus about the age category which should form the category referred to as “youth” in India. The Government of India had its own age bracket of 13–35 years as a definition of youth in different national youth policies. However, in the most recent National Youth Policy (2012), the age bracket was shrunk to 16–30 years. Researchers who conducted studies on Indian youth have looked at a different age bracket—up to around 25 years. So the challenge of doing research on Indian youth begins with the very definition of youth with regard to age, a category on which there is hardly any consensus. The difference of opinion about youth is not only limited to different age groups, but also other demographic factors, such as location, gender, level of educational attainment, caste, region, religion, and economic class of the family to which the youth belong; all these throw up challenges in defining the category referred to as Indian youth. These differences in social characteristics of the youth affect the perception, attitude, and behavior of Indian youth, not only about social issues but also about issues related to politics and various aspects of electoral participation. This book makes an attempt to map such differences in opinion, attitude, perception, and participation of Indian youth in electoral politics. While the debate about which age category should be referred to as youth in India may not settle down quickly, one thing on which there is near unanimity is that the youth constitute a

xvi Indian Youth and Electoral Politics

sizeable proportion of the Indian population. Looking at the large proportion of youth above 18 years of age, it is natural that the youth also constitute a sizeable proportion of voters in India. The number of young voters might have been much bigger if they had registered themselves as voters in similar proportion as voters of other age groups did. A recent study conducted by the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) in Delhi indicated lower enrollment ratio of youth as voters compared to other age groups of voters. The youth constitute a large number of Indian voters, even if their registration ratio is lower compared to the registration ratios amongst voters of other age groups. The youth in India constitute a sizeable section of Indian voters, but youth voters, as a political category, has hardly been an issue of political interest and research till recent times. It was only after the 2009 Lok Sabha election that there has been increasing interest in youth vote in India. Not only are political parties eyeing the youth vote since they are in sizeable numbers, through various campaigns and specially designed programs, even the Election Commission is making efforts to mobilize the youth toward higher electoral participation. After the 2009 Lok Sabha election, there is a good amount of media coverage on the youth, both in print and electronic media. The focus was largely because of the wide belief that a large number of young members got elected to the 15th Lok Sabha. There was also a shared belief that compared to the past, the young voters were politically mobilized in greater numbers during the 2009 Lok Sabha election due to Rahul Gandhi’s campaign. Some also believed that the young voters voted for the younger candidates in sizeable proportions during the 2009 Lok Sabha election. While the focus was on how young voters played an important role during the 2009 Lok Sabha election and how a large number of young politicians got elected to the Parliament, a simple count of those who were below the age of 40 years at the time of getting elected to the Lok Sabha in 2009 suggested that there were only 79 members who were in this “young” category. There was so much media hype about a large number of young members getting elected to the 15th Lok Sabha, but when we compared the number of young members of Parliament (MPs) in the 15th

Preface

xvii

Lok Sabha with the previous House, it was clear that the number of young MPs in the 15th Lok Sabha was not higher. While a simple count helps us answer this rather simple question, there remains the bigger questions of whether there is a “young vote” in India, is voting preference of the young voter somewhat different from voters of other age groups, what is the level of interest in politics of the Indian youth, do we see declining interest in politics amongst young voters, and so on. In a nutshell, the issue which needed careful analysis was whether a young candidate motivates the young voters for greater electoral participation. The book focuses on some of these issues which concern not only researchers but also those who are active in politics, that is, political leaders and political parties. The questions may be simple but there was hardly any evidence available to answer these questions concerning youth and electoral politics. Fully aware of the lack of information on this issue, I thought of doing a systematic study and research on the issue of youth and politics, focusing on various aspects of youth participation in electoral politics, from participation in protest movements to participation in election rallies and campaigns for voting.

Acknowledgments

W

hen I shared the idea of this study with the KonradAdenauer-Stiftung (KAS), which had also supported our earlier study on Indian youth a few years back, the Foundation showed enormous interest in the proposed study. I thank KAS for not only providing necessary support for the endeavors that formed the basis of this book, but also for providing critical comments and valuable suggestions which helped in shaping this study. The study benefited enormously from regular inputs and encouragement I received from my colleagues at the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), especially V. B. Singh, D. L. Sheth, Yogendra Yadav, and Sanjeer Alam. I must also thank Rajeev Bhargava, the present director of the CSDS, who provided me the opportunity to work independently which helped me to complete this book on time. I also express my gratitude to Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri, who always encouraged me to write this book. Several researchers working at Lokniti helped me at different times and at different stages of writing this book, but I must begin by expressing my thanks to some of my colleagues working with Lokniti, who are also contributors to this volume—Vibha Attri, Kinjal Sampat, Jyoti Mishra, and Shreyas Sardesai. They have not only contributed chapters for this volume, but also worked hard at different stages of this project. Besides the contributors, thanks are also due to a few other associates namely, Banasmita Bora, Ashish Ranjan, and Amrish, who helped in various research activities of this study. Thanks are also due to the Data Unit team of the CSDS, which includes Himanshu Bhattacharya, Kanchan Malhotra, and K. A. Q. A. Hilal. It may be unjust if I do not mention the names of Dhananjay Kumar Singh and Anuradha Singh, who

xx Indian Youth and Electoral Politics

extended various kinds of administrative and logistics support to me whenever needed. My gratitude to Shamshad Ansari, Suprio Basu, Nitin Birmal, Satya Prakash Dash, Sajjad Ibrahim K. M., Sudhir Kumar, Sanjay Lodha, Kushal Pal, G. Koteswara Prasad, Rakesh Ranjan, P. Narsimha Rao, and Yatindra Singh Sisodia, who helped in conducting the survey in different states. Without their intense engagement with the project, the study may not have been completed and the data may not have been available for writing this book. My wife Rashmi has always been a source of inspiration for me. She has always provided the much-needed moral support for writing this book. She has not only supported and encouraged me in writing this book but in anything that I have planned to write. I am sure that without her moral support it would have not been easy for me to complete this book. My two daughters Vishakha Nandini and Manavi Nandini also need special mention. They feel extremely happy and share the joy when my writing gets published in newspapers, newsmagazines, journals, or in edited volumes. My younger daughter Manavi would make it a point to show my article to her friends to share the happiness, and would also read it and try to make some sense. I have also enjoyed her curious reading of some paragraphs randomly picked from a chapter of my previous books. This book would give my daughters another volume to try and read, and share the joy in their own way. It is a real pleasure to see my daughters expressing their happiness on my success. Both my daughters, Vishakha and Manavi, use the bookmark of the cover page of my previous book. I am sure that they would be happy to have a new bookmark which they can share with their friends. I must thank all other family members who provided moral support to me in writing this book. There may be a few others who provided different kinds of support to me while writing this book. I may not have mentioned their names, but my sincere thanks to all of them as well. Sanjay Kumar

Introduction

P

olitics in India, more so electoral politics, is largely discussed in a context of caste cleavages for political parties, largely with reference to mobilization of the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in the mid-1990s and about Dalits in recent times. Many scholars have focused on caste politics and its impact on electoral politics. Christophe Jaffrelot (2003), Sudha Pai (2002, 2010), Kanchan Chandra (2004), and Pradeep Chhibber (1999) have worked extensively on the theme of “caste and electoral politics,” and focused on the emergence of caste and identity politics, and how it changed the nature of party politics and electoral competition in India. There has also been a focus on women in Indian politics, and the debate revolves around whether women vote differently compared to men and whether there is something called “women’s vote,” if not nationally, at least in states where women have occupied the top position of chief minister. Some studies have focused on women’s voting patterns and their role in electoral politics. For instance, after the 2004 Lok Sabha election, Rajeshwari Deshpande analyzed the voting pattern among women and concluded that women do not vote as a unit, rather their socioeconomic background influences their voting behavior (Deshpande 2004); the same kind of voting pattern was observed among women during the 2009 Lok Sabha election (Deshpande 2009). On the other hand, some studies show that in some states electoral victory depends on women’s participation in voting. For instance, in recent elections in Bihar (2010) (“Bihar Election: Women’s Mandate,” NDTV Web site, November 18, 2010) and Punjab (2012) women’s vote and support was an important factor for the victory of Janata Dal (United)—Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Shiromani Akali Dal—BJP alliances in the

xxii Indian Youth and Electoral Politics

respective states (Economic and Political Weekly 2012). While analyzing electoral outcome, locality is also an explanatory variable which shows how voting pattern is different in villages and cities, and many scholars have focused on rural–urban dimension and its impact on voting pattern. However, the young—the youth voters—as a political category has hardly been an issue of political interest and analysis till recent times. It was only during the 2009 Lok Sabha election and in various assembly elections after the Lok Sabha election that there has been increasing interest in the youth vote in India. A good amount of media coverage of the 2009 Lok Sabha by both print and electronic focused on the youth in Indian politics. It was widely believed that a large number of young members got elected to the 15th Lok Sabha in 2009 mainly because the young voters, who constitute a large proportion of voters, voted for the younger candidates. While media analysis of the 2009 Lok Sabha election results was full of analysis about a large number of young members getting elected to the Parliament, a careful analysis of the age of the members elected to the 15th Lok Sabha suggests that there were only 79 members (below the age of 40 years) and this number was not higher compared to the previous House. This was rather simple: a manual count of members elected to the Lok Sabha and a look at their age helped in answering this simple question. But the bigger question of whether there is a young vote in India needed careful analysis. The book focuses on this important issue, on which there is increasing interest not only amongst researchers, but also amongst practitioners, political leaders, and political parties.

Why Is There So Much Focus on the Young Voters in India? Indian youth as a category is extremely complex and difficult to ascertain at a time when there is no general consensus yet amongst scholars on its minimal definition. Nonetheless, the importance of youth as a demographic category due to its sheer size in the subcontinent is undeniable. Today the country’s

Introduction

xxiii

median age is 25 years. This makes India 10 years younger to China and 15 years younger to the United States. While India’s median age will increase gradually in the coming decades and the country is expected to age faster than expected (“India ageing faster than expected,” Mint, November 19, 2012), the fact is that today’s reality of a young population makes it impossible to ignore the youth. To quote more figures, those in the age group 15–24 years (definition of youth as per the United Nations) make up about one-fifth of the total population of India. What’s more, a projection for 2011 suggested a population of 240 million of them (Government of India 2009), and according to various estimates, by 2020 the average age of the country would be 29 years (Chandrasekhar et al. 2006). This demographic bulge where a large majority of India’s working age population consists of the youth has been of interest to economists and demographers for some time now. The assumption that this bulge will have ramifications in the sociopolitical world is a result of viewing youth as a homogeneous category. By using a cross-sectional survey of youth as the backbone of this study, we shift away from the homogeneous definition of the category of youth, and reveal youth as a demographic category which is differentiated on the basis of their socioeconomic location in society. The study is a comparative exercise juxtaposing the young and the older generation, and an analysis over time of certain aspects of youth. According to the Government of India’s Department of Youth Affairs and Sports, the “youth” is the group between the ages of 13 and 35 years. In 2011, a working group on Adolescent and Youth Development of the department had recommended that 18–30 years should be the age criterion for youth and that people between 13 and 18 years should be categorized as adolescents (Government of India 2011). Keeping these facts in mind and the requirements of our specific study which is political in nature, we have defined youth respondents as those between the ages of 18 and 33 years. The rationale for choosing 18 years as the minimum age is because it is the minimum voting age in India.1 We have juxtaposed our findings of the youth in comparison with those who are 34 years and above, referred to as “Others.” Comparison is provided with those aged 34 years and above to

xxiv Indian Youth and Electoral Politics

better understand if the trend and political participation of the youth differ from the rest of the population. If there is a large young population in India, it is natural to expect a large proportion of young voters in India (18–25 years). While there is no official estimate of what proportion of voters is in this age category nationally or in different states, before every election the Election Commission of India releases figures of how many new voters were added to the electoral roll of a particular state. While this does not give an estimate of young voters, it certainly indicates that over the years, because of a growing young population, the proportion of young voters too is increasing. Since 2011, in order to encourage more young voters in Indian politics, the government has been celebrating January 25 as National Voters’ Day, specifically to enroll in the electoral rolls, the newly eligible youth who have just attained the age of 18 years. According to data released by the Election Commission on the third National Voters’ Day (January 25, 2013), over 20.32 million citizens were registered under the enrollment drive conducted by the Commission across the country (“National Voters’ Day being observed today,” Zee News, January 25, 2013). The terms “youth” and “young” have been interchangeably used throughout various chapters of the book to mean all those voters who are in the age group 18–33 years. For a better understanding, we have divided the youth into two groups: 18–25 years and 26–33 years. In the book, the two terms “youth leaders” and “young leaders” have also been interchangeably used. The definition for young leaders in this study is all those in the age group 25–40 years when they got elected to the Lok Sabha in 2009. The terms “older respondents,” “senior respondents,” “other respondents,” and “non-youth respondents” have been interchangeably used throughout various chapters of the book to refer to those voters in the age group 34 years and above. Even terms such as “senior leaders” or “older leaders” have been interchangeably used. The age definition for senior leaders in this study is all those in the age group 41 years and above. Figures indicate that there is an increasing number of young voters in Indian elections. But does it have any impact on electoral patterns? Do young voters favor one party more than some other

Introduction

xxv

parties? There is a strong belief that the young voters prefer/ vote for younger candidates, that is, young leaders. The belief is that during the 2009 Lok Sabha election, the young voted/preferred the Congress over other parties due to its young leader Rahul Gandhi, and similarly, a large proportion of young voters voted for the Samajwadi Party largely due to its young leader Akhilesh Yadav. But it is perhaps too simplistic to conclude that voting choices of the youth are dictated mainly by the age of the candidate. Such an analysis not only ignores the diversity of young voters, but also completely discounts the reality that Lok Sabha’s young contingent is largely made up of members of political families. A majority of the young members of the Parliament are from a privileged background and their election could have had largely to do with the fact that they belong to families that are well entrenched in politics, a point made effectively by writer and historian Patrick French in his book India: A Portrait (2011). French’s analysis of the profiles of members of the 15th Lok Sabha found that nearly two-thirds of the MPs aged below 40 had a hereditary connection.2 For instance, India’s youngest member of Parliament (MP), Hamdullah Sayeed, is the son of a former nine-time MP. Similarly Agatha Sangma, who was the youngest minister in the government till recently, is the daughter of another former nine-time MP. Therefore, family connections and not their age could perhaps better explain the entry of young candidates into the lower house of Parliament. Another fact to consider is that this is by no means the youngest Lok Sabha. It is in fact one of the least young. Research conducted by the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) indicates that the average age of the 15th Lok Sabha is 53, which makes it the second oldest House so far (Figure I.1). Moreover, when we look at the composition of all the 15 Lok Sabhas till date, we see that the first two Lok Sabhas (1952 and 1957) saw as many as 164 young MPs (those aged between 25 and 40 years) getting elected, the highest ever (Figure I.2). While there were fluctuations in the numerical strength of young MPs in successive elections between 1962 and 1984, what is significant is that the figure of young MPs never went below 100 during this period. In contrast, from 1989 to 2009, the numbers have always remained below 100, with the

1952

45.8

1957

45.8

Source: Authors.

42

44

46

48

50

52

1962

1967

49.12

1971

49.17

Figure I.1: Average Age of MPs Increasing with Time 54

1977

1980

1984

50.29 49.41 49.78

1996

1998

51.47 51.69

1991

51.1

1989

50.23

1999

51.92

52.74

2004

53.13

2009

53.03

1952

164

1957

164

Source: Authors.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

1962

117

1967

114

1971

105

105

1977

Figure I.2: Number of Young MPs Decreasing with Time 180

1980

117

1984

112

1989

93

1991

86

1996

102

1998

72

1999

90

2004

79

2009

79

xxviii Indian Youth and Electoral Politics

exception of 1996 when it was 102. Both the 14th and the 15th Lok Sabhas saw the second lowest number of young MPs getting elected, the lowest (72) being in the 12th Lok Sabha. During the last seven Lok Sabhas (1989–2009) the share of young members has not crossed one-fifth of the total strength of the Lok Sabha. Also, there is no distinct pattern to the youth vote. In the last five Lok Sabha elections, for which there is reliable data from the National Election Studies conducted by the CSDS, the turnout amongst young voter was about 4 percent lower than the average national turnout, and the youth vote for the major political parties has been within a two-percentage point band around the national vote share of the respective political parties. It seems that the young voters are not different compared to voters of the Other age group. Therefore, the big question is, has the distinctiveness of the youth vote been hyped by the media? Is there really a youth vote that votes more or less as a bloc or is that a myth? Furthermore, do young voters share political opinions that are different from voters of the other age group? Hardly any study has focused on these questions, and in the light of this void in the research debate on this issue, this book tries to map out the nature and character of young Indian voters and their engagement with politics, based on a study conducted by the CSDS. The study was conducted using three research pathways: a survey of cross section of voters (both young and voters of other age groups), focus group discussions in some of those constituencies where survey was conducted, and interviews with some young MPs who got elected to the 15th Lok Sabha. The survey which forms the backbone of the book was conducted in a select sample of those Lok Sabha constituencies from where either a young candidate was elected to the Lok Sabha or was runner-up during the 2009 Lok Sabha election. Of the total 140 Lok Sabha constituencies where a young candidate (25–40 years of age) either got elected or was runner-up, 10 percent—14 Lok Sabha constituencies—were selected randomly. Having randomly selected our 14 Lok Sabha constituencies for the survey, two assembly segments were randomly selected in each selected Lok Sabha constituency. The third stage of sample selection was of sampling the locations where the survey was to be conducted.

Introduction

xxix

Four polling stations in each selected assembly constituency were selected using systematic random sampling technique. The selection of polling booths within the assembly constituencies helped us in locating the villages and the location in urban areas where the survey was to be undertaken. The final stage in sample selection was of the voters whom we wanted to interview. The sample of voters who were to be interviewed was selected from the most recent electoral rolls of each sampled location. The survey was primarily designed with the aim of looking at the correlation between young candidates and the tendency of young voters to vote for them. Besides that, the research also tried to investigate various other issues such as the levels of interest and participation of the youth in politics, the opinions of the youth on questions of nepotism and dynastic politics, their views and thoughts on contemporary democracy, the issue of electoral reforms, and views about choosing politics as career. The attempt was to see whether the young voters were different from the older generation in their vote preferences, engagement with the electoral and political processes, and their opinions on various issues confronting politics and democracy. A structured questionnaire was specially designed with largely close-ended questions for conducting the interviews amongst the randomly selected voters (Appendix I). The fieldwork for the survey was conducted by college and university students who were imparted special training in techniques of survey research and data collection methods. All the interviews were conducted at voters’ houses or their places of work. A total of 3,700 voters were randomly selected from the most updated electoral rolls, of which 2,352 voters were successfully interviewed. The- samples mirror the image of the universe for which the study was conducted. Of the total interviews conducted for the survey, 26 percent of the sample was in urban location while 74 percent was in rural. The sample represented both men and women: 56 percent men and 44 percent women. In the sample there were 24 percent Dalits, 5 percent Adivasis, and 8 percent Muslims (Appendix II). Contrasting the demographic importance vis-à-vis political opinions of the youth is the revelation of the fact that youth as a

xxx Indian Youth and Electoral Politics

political community, distinct solely on the basis of their age, has as yet not emerged. On various parameters, the youth continue to think and act in ways similar to the older generation. In the political arena, the youth do not have choices which unite them despite their social coordinates. In other words political choices of the youth are determined by factors other than age, such as location, community, education attainment, and class. This in turn deters youth across the country from identifying choices that are specific to young people. Voting patterns analyzed in this study suggest that youth per se do not show leanings toward any single political ideology or affiliate themselves with any political party in particular, which would distinguish them from their older counterparts located within the same sociopolitical coordinates (Appendix III). Locality, class, level of education, and gender intersect with the variable of age, creating a matrix which reflects diversity rather than uniformity of thought and action within the category of youth. Factors affecting diversity of opinions among youth are not limited only to those mentioned; rather, age itself seems to be creating an effect profound enough on various counts for us to believe that on certain issues the category of youth (defined in this book as those between 18 and 33 years) can be further divided into two separate age segments: the younger group consisting of all those aged 18–25 years, and a more mature segment of those aged between 26 and 33 years. The age group 18–25 years mostly includes those youth who are in the process of completing their education and are beginning their search for a job/ livelihood. The age group 26–33 years mostly consists of young women and men who have either completed further education, and are either well settled or are in the process of settling down in their jobs and in life. We are yet to ascertain whether this is an age or a period effect, but on a number of significant parameters such as participation in politics, interest in politics, and ideas regarding electoral reforms, youth in the age group 26–33 years voice opinions rather distinct from the younger age group. It is difficult to determine whether this age group behaves more like those above the age of 33 or are more aligned with the youngest segment due to lack of any such consistency. However,

Introduction

xxxi

the distinctness of their opinion on certain occasions and the significant juncture of socialization in terms of their life cycle that they presently find themselves highlight their importance as a subgroup of youth which needs further attention. Not only is the category of youth wrought with diversity but also with internal contradictions, especially when the arena of ideas is contrasted with that of actual action. While participation in voting remains consistent across time, interest in politics is observed as rising among youth over the years. To further engage with this idea, while youth political leadership as an idea is strongly supported by the youth, across all constituencies with young leaders in the run, youth voter turnout either remains comparable to the overall turnout or dips lower in some cases. Support for the idea of a young leadership does not seem enough to mobilize the young to exercise their vote even in situations where young candidates are serious contenders in elections. There is a gap between ideation and action, which could also in turn be conceptualized as a specific emerging engagement of the youth with politics at an ideation level. Three indicators observed across various facets of this study strongly suggest the same. First, youth across categories are a lot more opinionated than their older counterparts. Second, the support for young political leadership, and finally, an overwhelming agreement with the idea of electoral reforms such as the right to reject and the right to recall seem to suggest a certain unity within the ideas of youth. Young political leadership and electoral reforms prove as significant nodes where this faint and as yet emerging engagement between the arena of politics and the country’s young can be further strengthened. Gender matters. We cannot say this more emphatically, as across themes—interest, participation, and opinions—women and men continue to occupy different worlds both in the arena of ideas and more so in the arena of action. While instruments of modernization such as education and exposure to media help to a limited extent in making women more opinionated, none of these factors have any significant impact upon women when it comes to actual participation in the public sphere. Far less young women, as compared to young men, participate in protests or

xxxii Indian Youth and Electoral Politics

demonstrations, or in any electoral activities. Although a number of women have political aspirations, this is lower than that of young men. The fact of invisibility of young women from the public sphere, whether physical or ideational, and more so among the world of politics, stands unchallenged according to our study. While studying the youth, it seems one cannot overemphasize the importance of studying the effect of media on the youth. Exposure to media instantly raises awareness about political events, interest in politics, makes one opinionated regarding electoral reforms, and lends greater support for young political leadership. The importance of media exposure lies in the fact that it has an instantaneous, rather than gradual, impact on an individual. The sudden increase in the proportion of respondents aware about political events, having opinion on political reforms, or having an interest in politics, between those not exposed to media and those having low media exposure, is unmatched and far beyond the impact of education or urbanization. Chapter 1 explores the level of awareness of Indian youth about current political events and political institutions. The youth are more aware about political events compared to those older than them. Higher awareness is not merely a function of the young being more educated as compared to the rest, since even with similar level of education, the youth rank higher on awareness compared to people of other age groups. Young men are more aware compared to young women and this too is not merely due to a difference in the level of educational attainment. Urban youth are more aware compared to rural youth across education categories. This shows that gender and locality matter in the level of awareness about political events in the country. Chapter 2 focuses on the issue of interest in politics and political participation amongst Indian youth. Conventional wisdom suggests that young people in India are cut off and alienated from politics, with many saying that this disengagement of the youth reflects a wider problem of legitimacy of the political system. This chapter addresses these issues and finds that contrary to widespread belief, young people are interested in political matters, even though they may be skeptical about the system and their concerns may lie beyond the limits of how politics is

Introduction

xxxiii

traditionally understood. While interest in politics among the youth has increased over the years, youth electoral participation in terms of voter turnout has remained lower compared to the overall turnout in the last few elections. Participation in electoral and extra-electoral activities such as protests and demonstrations seems to be on the rise, though. Again, gender matters; political participation is lower amongst young women compared to young men. This difference remains despite women being urbanized and educated. Attaining education does not necessarily increase the presence of women in the political sphere. Overall, the urban youth is more interested in politics but the rural youth outnumber the urban youth in political participation. Apart from this, the chapter also highlights that the presence of young contestants during the 2009 election did not necessarily result in young voters coming out and voting in large numbers in those constituencies. In fact, the turnout of the older voters in these constituencies was much higher than that of the young voters. Chapter 3 analyzes in great detail the voting pattern of Indian youth. This is not just for one Lok Sabha election, but for the five Lok Sabha elections during the period 1996–2009. The analyses have been done with the help of the data collected by the National Election Studies conducted by the CSDS after every Lok Sabha election since 1996. The voting pattern of the youth is not very different from voters of the other age group; they do not seem to be inclined particularly for or against any political party. The mid-1990s witnessed a distinct shift of the youth toward the BJP (1998 and 1999 Lok Sabha elections), more amongst the urban and educated youth. But the BJP seems to have lost its advantage amongst the urban and educated youth in recent years. The gender divide is quite evident amongst the youth; young women are more in favor of the Congress while young men more inclined toward the BJP. The chapter also focuses on the voting pattern of youths from different communities, mainly Dalits, Adivasis, OBCs, and upper castes. The idea of political leadership by the young and the proposition that young political candidates make a difference in attitudes, perceptions, and participation of the voters in elections, more so amongst the young voters, is the central focus theme in

xxxiv Indian Youth and Electoral Politics

Chapter 4 of this book. There is a preference for the young candidate amongst all voters across age groups; however, youth are more supportive of the young candidate compared to the older age groups of voters. Overall, young respondents evaluate the young candidates more positively compared to the older candidate in terms of taking care of voters in their constituency. There is hardly any support for dynasty politics, but when the choice is between a young dynastic leader over an old non-dynastic one, the young leader seems to be the popular choice. However, very few admit to the idea that the young age of a candidate can be a sole attribute or the most important one for electing a candidate. Ideas and opinions of youth about reforms in the electoral process are discussed in Chapter 5. If there is an issue on which the youth—across age, gender, and level of educational attainment— come together, it is in their support for ideas of electoral reforms. While various kinds of ideas or proposed electoral reforms get approval both amongst the youth and the older age groups, the support for proposed reform is more amongst the youth as compared to people from older age groups. The proposed electoral reforms get greater approval amongst the urban and educated youth. There was more support, than opposition, for all four ideas of electoral reform on which questions were asked in the study. The consensus upon the right to recall is highest among both the young and the older age groups, whereas support for setting an upper age limit of 65 years for contesting elections is the lowest among both the young and the old. Chapter 6 looks at how open the Indian youth are to the idea of choosing politics as their career. It analyzes responses to the question asked in the study: if given an opportunity, would one like to make politics one’s career? A sizeable proportion of youth wants to take up politics as their career. Amongst those who are unwilling to take up politics as a career, a large proportion sees the lack of their acquaintance with political leaders and their not belonging to any political family as a serious bottleneck. This finding should be seen in the present day context of attempts being made by several political parties to embrace, foster, and nurture youth talent within their folds.

Introduction

xxxv

Finally, this study must be understood not just in terms of the life-cycle effect or the biological impact of ageing, and the changes in attitude and behavior of people as they grow older, but also the period effect. The period effect refers to major events that take place during a time period and are likely to have a concurrent impact on all age groups, even though their effect is often strongest on the young because their values and practices are less fixed than those of other age groups. Since the definition of youth for this study conducted in 2011 was those aged between 18 and 33 years, it means that the attitudes and opinions of people born between 1978 and 1993 were the focus of the study. During this time period, as well as the years after it, up till 2011, India has been witness to tremendous political and economic upheavals. This was a period marked by political assassinations, corruption scandals, secessionist violence, the rise of religious extremism and violence, the fragmentation of the Indian political landscape with the rise of religion- and caste-based political parties, and the opening up of the Indian economy, among other things. It can therefore be assumed that many of the youth interviewed in the study would have been to some degree affected by some of the events that took place during this period, shaping and affecting their ways of looking at issues. In other words, their views are perhaps a reflection of the period in which they grew up and socialized, and that is what sets them apart from not just the older voters but also their young counterparts from the previous generation. It could be argued that the current generation of young people that this study covers is different from the previous generations of young people, due to their life experiences in a volatile, hostile, and intense environment. The readers of the book should therefore bear this period context in mind.

Notes and References Notes 1.

Earlier, the minimum age for voting in India was 21 years. It was reduced to 18 years in 1989 by the 61st Amendment to the Indian Constitution.

xxxvi Indian Youth and Electoral Politics 2.

The full dataset on family politics in the Lok Sabha is available at the Web site for French (2011), at http://www.theindiasite.com/973-2/.

References Chandra, Kanchan. 2004. Why Ethnic Parties Succeed: Patronage and Ethnic Head Counts in India. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Chandrasekhar, C. P., Jayati Ghosh and Anamitra Roychowdhury. 2006. “The ‘Demographic Dividend’ and Young India’s Economic Future,” Economic and Political Weekly, 41 (49): 5055–64. Chhibber, Pradeep. 1999. Democracy without Associations: Transformation of the Party System and Social Cleavages in India. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Deshpande, Rajeshwari. 2004. “How Gendered Was Women’s Participation in Election 2004?” Economic and Political Weekly, 39 (51): 5431–36. ———. 2009. “How Did Women Vote in Lok Sabha Elections 2009?” Economic and Political Weekly, 44 (39): 83–87. Economic and Political Weekly. 2012. “State Elections—Fourteenth Assembly Elections in Punjab,” Economic and Political Weekly, 47 (14): 71–75. French, Patrick. 2011. India: A Portrait–An Intimate Biography of 1.2 Billion People. New Delhi: Allen Lane. Government of India. 2009. A Profile of Youth in India. New Delhi: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. Retrieved from http://measuredhs.com/ pubs/pdf/OD59/OD59.pdf. ———. 2011. Report of the Working Group on Adolescent and Youth Development for Formulation of 12th Five-Year Plan (2012–17). New Delhi: Department of Youth Affairs, Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports. Retrieved from http://planningcommission.nic.in/aboutus/ committee/wrkgrp12/hrd/wg_repadolscent.pdf. Jaffrelot, Christophe. 2003. India’s Silent Revolution: The Rise of the Low Castes in North Indian Politics. New Delhi: Permanent Black. Pai, Sudha. 2002. Dalit Assertion and the Unfinished Democratic Revolution: The Bahujan Samaj Party in Uttar Pradesh. New Delhi: SAGE Publications. ———. 2010. Developmental State and the Dalit Question in Madhya Pradesh: Congress Response. New Delhi: Routledge.

1 Awareness on Political Issues Vibha Attri

“

If you don’t know the rules of the game and the players and don’t care about the outcome, you’re unlikely to try playing yourself” (Putnam 2000: 35). Robert Putnam’s keen observation definitely holds true when we study the relationship between political awareness and political participation. Political awareness, or knowledge about political events and issues, largely tends to determine the attitude of citizens in a democracy and whether they actively participate in politics or not. Citizens in a democracy should have a minimum understanding of the political system in which they express preferences and elect representatives, as knowledge is a prerequisite to successful political engagement. If citizens are not observant of what happens around them, it invariably leads to a nonparticipatory citizenry. The strength of any democracy resides in a well-informed citizenry. Robert Dahl too in his works has stressed upon how informed citizens are considered to be a central pillar of democratic theory and a crucial element of democracy (Dahl 1979). According to him, informed citizens are those citizens who are aware about the political and social events that take place around them. For this reason, political awareness or knowledge is seen as a functional and indispensable element of a viable democracy. The study of political

2 Vibha Attri

awareness among citizens is therefore important and more so in a democratic country such as India. The study conducted by the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) enables us to take this initiative to study political awareness among Indian citizens. In our study, political awareness refers to how aware the young voters are about politics and other political activities which occurred in the country in the recent past. Awareness is not seen in a narrow sense of just knowing the name of political representatives but relates to awareness about important political events in the country as well. The level of political awareness differs among citizens. This chapter tries to delve into the level of political awareness among Indian youth. It also looks at whether age has an effect on political awareness and discussion of current political issues and events. Are the Indian youth, in the constituencies with a young political contestant, politically more aware as compared to other age groups? We also analyze the relationship between the pattern in level of awareness and various sociodemographic factors. To measure political awareness among younger and older people, an index was formed using some questions which gauged the frequency of awareness about important issues and events of 2010–11.1

Political Awareness among Indian Youth The study reveals that 31 percent of the youth who were interviewed fall in the category of no awareness, which means nearly one-third of Indian youth were not aware of political events that happened around them. Sixty-nine percent of the youth were aware of events; out of these 20 percent were highly aware and 49 percent had moderate political awareness (Table 1.1). The level of awareness is not uniform among citizens and varies among different age groups. While 20 percent youth have a high level of political awareness, only 15 percent of older respondents have high awareness levels. When we combined moderate and high levels of awareness, this gap widened substantially.

Awareness on Political Issues

3

Table 1.1: About One-third of Indian Youth Politically Unaware No Awareness

Moderate Awareness

High Awareness

Youth

31

49

20

Others

43

42

15

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

Sixty-nine percent youth are in the category of politically aware citizens compared to 57 percent older people. Within the youth category, the age group 18–25 years is more aware than those between 26 and 33 years. Twenty-three percent of youth in the age group 18–25 years have high political awareness whereas 18 percent of youth between the age group 26–33 years are highly aware about current political events. This shows that the level of awareness increases with decrease in age (Table 1.2). This increased level of awareness among youth compared to the non-youth further leads us to take a look at the level of awareness within the youth as a group from various sociodemographic perspectives. The subsequent figures indicate that these sociodemographic variables are factors for the determination of level of political awareness among youth. Young women lag behind young men in attainment of political knowledge and awareness about current political issues. Twenty-nine percent of young men are highly politically aware compared to only 9 percent women having high political awareness. To look into the matter as to Table 1.2: About Political Events, Youth More Aware Compared to Others Age Group

No Awareness

Moderate Awareness

High Awareness

18–25 years

30

47

23

26–33 years

32

50

18

34+ years

43

42

15

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

4 Vibha Attri

why there is a huge gap between the levels of political awareness of young men and young women, we compared men and women of similar level of education, locality, media exposure, and economic class. If we carefully look at Table 1.3, we can see that the young women who are high on political awareness belong to the middle and upper strata of society, are highly educated, live in urban areas, and have high media exposure. The educational background of a woman is an indicator of high awareness. Twenty-three percent of college-educated young women are highly politically aware compared to other young women from various categories. But when we compare young women with young men from the same socioeconomic background, we find that the difference between their levels of awareness is huge. Both gender and locality are factors which affect awareness levels among youth. Youth living in rural areas are less politically aware compared to youth from urban areas. Sixteen percent of rural youth are highly aware about politics and political events, compared to 30 percent urban youth (Table 1.4). Table 1.3: Political Awareness Higher among Young Men Compared to Young Women Young Men

Young Women

Locality Rural

25

5

Urban

38

19

Education Nonliterate College-educated

2

1

42

23

6

1

39

18

Media exposure No media exposure High media exposure Class Lower

12

3

Middle

37

16

Upper

38

10

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

Awareness on Political Issues

5

Table 1.4: Rural Youth Less Aware Compared to Urban Youth No Awareness

High Awareness

Rural youth

34

16

Urban youth

23

30

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

This indicates the correlation between the effect of urbanization and the level of political awareness. With modernization and urbanization, youth get more education, and they consistently discuss political and social issues with their peer group and family. Urbanization increases the amount of political communication, and leads to greater awareness of social and political needs among citizens. Urbanization is one of the processes of modernization which shifts the political orientations of citizens from parochial to participant. As we can see in Table 1.5, nonliterate youth in urban areas are more politically aware than rural, nonliterate youth. Similarly, more urban college-educated men are politically aware than rural young men with the same educational attainment. This shows that locality has a stronger influence than education for attaining political knowledge and political awareness. Hence, it is important to check whether the level of education has an effect on the level of awareness. Youth having college education are more politically aware than nonliterate youth. There is Table 1.5: Even with Similar Level of Education, Urban Youth More Aware Compared to Rural Youth Youth Nonliterate, rural young men Nonliterate, urban young men

High Awareness 1 5

College-educated, rural young men

31

College-educated, urban young men

45

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

6 Vibha Attri

a huge gap between the level of political awareness among nonliterates and higher-educated youth. Only 2 percent nonliterate youth are politically aware, whereas 36 percent highly educated youth have high level of political awareness. Education is a factor to generate political awareness among citizens, but locality overshadows the influence of education. Media exposure does have an impact on the level of political awareness. Since media is a source from where one can get information and details about various political events, it is not surprising that the person with no media exposure is less likely to be politically aware. That is why only 3 percent of the youth who have no media exposure acquire high level of political awareness. In contrast, 36 percent of the youth with high media exposure are also highly aware about political events of the recent past. With the increase in the level of exposure to media, the level of awareness also increases (Table 1.6). We find an interesting fact when we look at rural–urban political awareness and control the media exposure. Rural youth are more politically aware if they are highly exposed to media. As we can see in Table 1.7, rural youth with no media exposure are less politically aware than urban youth with no media exposure. The moment rural youth attain high level of media exposure, the trend changes. The rural youth become more politically aware than urban youth when they get more exposed to media. Economic background also influences political knowledge and awareness of the youth. Youth from the upper class are more aware than youth from the poor class. More than half of the youth Table 1.6: Awareness among Youth Increases with Increase in Level of Media Exposure Youth

High Awareness

No media exposure

3

Low media exposure

9

Medium media exposure

31

High media exposure

36

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

Awareness on Political Issues

7

Table 1.7: Rural Youth with High Media Exposure More Aware about Political Issues Political Awareness Rural youth with no media exposure

34

Urban youth with no media exposure

36

Rural youth with high media exposure

83

Urban youth with high media exposure

78

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

belonging to the poor class have no political awareness and political knowledge. Seven percent of youth from the poor class have high political awareness and the level of political awareness increases with the increase in the economic class of the youth. As we can see in Table 1.8, 31 percent of youth from the upper class are highly political aware. We can see that differences in awareness levels among demographic groups stand out. Education levels, exposure to media, economic class, locality, and gender have an effect on youths’ awareness level. The educated youth are more politically aware. Youth with high media exposure also rank high in political awareness. Our results clearly show that political awareness is significantly influenced by various sociodemographic aspects (Table 1.9). Moving on to youth who have no awareness about political events, nonliterate youth topped with 69 percent. Youth Table 1.8: Upper-class Youth Most Aware, Poor Youth Least Aware about Political Events Economic Class Poor

No Awareness

High Awareness

52

7

Lower

31

18

Middle

24

29

Upper

14

31

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

8 Vibha Attri Table 1.9: Urban, Educated, Upper Class, and Youth with High Media Exposure, More Aware about Political Events High Awareness College-educated youth

36

Youth with high media exposure

36

Upper-class youth

31

Urban youth

30

Young men

29

Rural youth

16

Young women

9

Youth belong to poor class

7

Youth with no media exposure

3

Nonliterate youth

2

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

with low media exposure followed the nonliterate youth, with 66 percent of them belonging to the category of No Awareness, followed by youth belonging to poor class, young women, and rural youth (Table 1.10). We also tried to look at the awareness of youth and older people about the names of their members of Parliament (MPs) and members of legislative assembly (MLAs). The awareness of the youth about both the MP and the MLA is higher than Others. One thing that is common to both the age groups is that both are more aware of their MLA than their MP. This finding shows their affiliation with regional politics compared to national politics (Table 1.11). Along with sociodemographic factors, some attitudinal factors also influence the political awareness of people. Among these attitudinal factors, interest in politics, faith in voting, and discussion of politics and political issues are the major ones which influence political awareness. Youth who have an interest in politics have more chances of being aware as compared to ones who have no interest in politics and political affairs. If youth are

Awareness on Political Issues

9

Table 1.10: Nonliterate, Poor, and Youth Unexposed to Media Are Politically Least Aware No Awareness Nonliterate youth

69

Youth with no media exposure

66

Youth from poor class

52

Young women

45

Rural youth

34

Urban youth

23

Young men

21

High media exposure

19

Upper-class youth

14

College-educated youth

12

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent. Table 1.11: Compared to Others, Youth More Familiar with Names of MP and MLA Knew Name of Their MP

Knew Name of Their MLA

Youth

58

64

Others

51

55

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

interested in politics they will try to keep themselves aware about day-to-day political events that take place. This in turn will boost their awareness in politics. Our data also revealed this trend. As we move from No to High interest in politics, the level of political awareness also goes up. More than half of the youth who have no interest in politics have no political awareness (Table 1.12). Youth who value their vote more, that is, those who feel that their vote has an effect on how the country is run, are more politically aware than those who think that their votes have no effect. Youth, belonging to the category of No Awareness are unlikely to have trust in their vote (Table 1.13).

10 Vibha Attri Table 1.12: Youth Interested in Politics More Aware Youth

No Awareness

High Awareness

Interested in politics

15

39

Not interested in politics

54

8

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent. Table 1.13: Youth Who Value Their Vote More Aware about Political Events Youth Opinion

No Awareness

High Awareness

Vote has an effect

23

26

Vote has no effect

37

17

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

Discussions on Politics and Political Events Social networks play a prominent role in the explanation of many political phenomena. Individuals who are more participative in political discussions are likely to be more aware of politics and political issues, and take active part in politics. Discussions result in enhancing awareness which further provide political knowledge to citizens. Table 1.14 shows that 18 percent of the youth had High discussion on the political events that occurred around them.2 There is a difference between the youth and the older people on this issue. Only 12 percent of the older respondents have frequent discussions on politics and current political affairs as compared to 18 percent of the youth. Forty-three percent of the older respondents have no discussion on political events as compared to 31 percent of the youth. If we take a look at the youth and non-youth who take part in moderate discussion, we see that the difference between the two is quite big. Fifty-one percent of the youth have moderate political discussions (to measure moderate discussion, frequently and very frequently were merged)

Awareness on Political Issues

11

Table 1.14: Frequent Discussions about Political Events More amongst the Youth Compared to Others No Discussion

Moderate Discussion

High Discussion

Youth

31

51

18

Others

43

45

12

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

compared to 45 percent of the non-youth. This shows that the youth, compared to others, have more discussions than others. The level of discussion among the youth rises on the basis of their sociodemographic background. Youth who are collegeeducated have frequent political discussions followed by youth who have high exposure to media, upper-class youth, male youth, and youth residing in urban areas. Therefore, we can clearly see that it is the educated youth who take part more frequently in political discussion. Youth with high exposure to media also had discussions on recent political issues that took place in the country (Table 1.15). There is no similarity between young men and young women even if they have attained the same level of education. Women with the same level of education do not take part in political discussions as much as young men. Education could be an important factor as we can see that with the increase in education level, Table 1.15: College Educated, Youth with High Media Exposure and Upper-class Youth More Active in Political Discussion Youth

High Discussion

College-educated

36

High media exposure

35

Upper-class

35

Young men

27

Urban

24

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

12 Vibha Attri Table 1.16: More Discussion of Politics by Young Men Compared to Young Women Have Discussion Nonliterate young men

42

Nonliterate young women

27

College-educated young men

90

College-educated young women

83

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

both young men and young women get into more discussion about current political issues, but we can see that gender affects participation in the political discussion (Table 1.16).

Discussions on Political Institutions and Actors The discussions on political events are not sufficient; rather, assessment of government and its functioning is also a crucial part of political discussions where citizens discuss the work done by political institutions and political actors.3 Our study shows that compared to older respondents, the youth are taking more part in discussions on political institutions and political actors. Again, there is a difference (3 percent) between the youth and others on the high frequency of discussion about the work done by political institutions and actors. Compared to 20 percent of the youth, 25 percent of the older respondents never have any discussion about the work done by political institutions (Table 1.17). It is important to highlight that the youth discuss the work of panchayats and municipality much more than they discuss the work of state and central governments. We can see almost the same pattern among the older people. The youth belonging to the age group 18–25 years discuss the work of the governments more than the other two age groups. As far as the discussion of the work of the MP, MLA, and political parties is concerned, the work of the MLA is discussed a little more

Awareness on Political Issues

13

Table 1.17: Compared to Others, Youth More Active in Discussions on Political Institutions No Discussion

Moderate Discussion

High Discussion

Youth

20

62

18

Others

25

60

15

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent. Table 1.18: About Every Political Institution, the Youth Discuss More Compared to Others Work Done by Discussion Central State by Government Government

MP

MLA

Political Parties

Panchayat or Municipality

Youth

50

56

52

58

57

74

Others

40

47

44

48

48

65

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

compared to the work of political parties and MPs. One reason for this could be that people feel closer to the local government as they are themselves more connected to the local government as compared to state and central governments, MPs, and political parties (Table 1.18). To see whether there was any difference in the frequency of political discussions among young men and women, and it was a result of education, we asked young men and women of different education levels. We saw that the difference between young females and males, on the frequency of political discussion, was not a result of education; even with the same educational qualification, young women lag behind young men (Table 1.19). When we look at the frequency of political discussion, class and media exposure seem to play an important part in whether youth take part in discussion. Thirty-one percent of the youth from upper class have frequent political discussions on political institutions and actors, followed by 28 percent of the youth with

14 Vibha Attri Table 1.19: Compared to Young Women of Similar Level of Education, Young Men Discuss Political Institutions More No Discussion

Frequent Discussion

Nonliterate young men

33

6

Nonliterate young women

47

2

8

32

14

13

College-educated young men College-educated young women Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

Table 1.20: Upper-class Youth with High Media Exposure Discuss Political Institutions the Most Discuss Political Institutions Upper-class youth

31

Youth with high media exposure

28

Graduate-and-above educated youth

26

Young men

25

Urban youth

21

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

high media exposure. Also, 26 percent of graduate youth have frequent discussions. Compared to women youth, male youth are more likely to have political discussions on political institutions and actors. The findings are similar for urban youth and rural youth; urban youth are more active in political discussions (Table 1.20).

Conclusion Based on the study conducted by CSDS, it can be broadly concluded that the young people in India or those aged between 18 and 33 years are more aware as compared to others or those

Awareness on Political Issues

15

above 33 years. Even among the youth, awareness decreases with an increase in age, which is to say that the youngest category (18–25 years) is more aware than the not-so-young (26–33 years). Socioeconomic factors further determine awareness levels among the youth. For instance, as the education of the youth increases so does their awareness about politics. Similarly, when analyzed in terms of gender, young women are less aware compared to young men. This difference among men and women is not a result of education. Women are generally less aware compared to men. Youth with high media exposure know more compared to ones with no and low exposure. Apart from awareness, the youth discuss politics and political events more than the nonyouth or others. This can also be an explanation for their high awareness. High awareness in turn can lead to high political participation, which is one of the themes of the following chapter.

Notes and References Notes 1.

Index of political awareness: The index was created to assess overall levels of awareness about current political issues. The questions used were Q3a1, Q3b1, Q3d1, Q3e1, and Q3f1 from the CSDS Youth and Politics study. The questions measured awareness level of youth regarding various political and social national events which occurred in that year namely, demonstrations by youth in Kashmir, Allahabad High Court verdict on the Ayodhya issue, Naxal violence, and corruption scandals related to the Commonwealth Games and the allocation of 2G spectrum.  All five questions were asked in a similar format where respondents had a choice of replying Yes, No, or No Answer. Responses to all these questions were collated and ordered into four categories: No Awareness, Low Awareness, Moderate Awareness, and High Awareness. All those who were aware of all five events formed the category of High Awareness. All those who were aware of three out of five, or four out of five, events formed the category of Moderate Awareness. All those who formed the category of No Awareness were not aware of any of the five events mentioned. All those aware of either one or two events out of the five were grouped as those low on awareness.

16 Vibha Attri 2.

3.

Index of discussion on current political issues: The index was created to assess the frequency of discussion on current political issues. The questions used were Q3a2, Q3b2, Q3c2, Q3d2, Q3e2 and Q3f2 from the CSDS Youth and Politics study. Q3a2 inquired whether respondents had heard of protest demonstrations by the youth in Kashmir, Q3b2 was regarding the Allahabad High Court verdict on the Ayodhya issue, Q3c2 was regarding Bihar assembly election, Q3d2 was regarding Naxal violence, Q3e2 was regarding corruption in the Commonwealth Games held in Delhi, and Q3f2 was about 2G spectrum (telecom) scam.  All six questions were asked in a similar format where respondents had a choice of replying Yes, No, or Don’t Remember. Responses to all these questions were collated and ordered into four categories: No Discussion, Low Discussion, Moderate Discussion, and High Discussion. All those who discuss all six political events formed the category of High Discussion. All those who discuss four out of six, or five out of six, formed the category of Moderate Discussion. All those who formed the category of No Discussion did not discuss any of the six political events mentioned. All those who discuss one, two, or three political events out of the six were grouped in the category of Low Discussion. Index of discussion on political institutions or political actors: The index was created to assess the frequency of discussion on political institutions and political actors. The battery of Q2 (from Q2a to Q2f) was used to create this index. Work done by the central government, the state government, MP, MLA, political parties, and panchayat/municipality were taken into consideration.  All six questions were asked in a similar format where respondents had a choice of replying Always, Sometimes, Never, or No Opinion. Responses to all these questions were collated and ordered into four categories: Never, Sometimes, Frequently, and Very Frequently. All those who discuss all six political institutions and actors formed the category of Very Frequently. All those who discuss four out of six, or five out of six, formed the category of Frequently. All those who formed the category of Never did not discuss any of the six political institutions and actors mentioned. All those who discuss one, two, or three political institutions and actors out of the six were grouped in the category of Sometimes.

References Dahl, Robert A. 1979. “Procedural Democracy,” in P. Laslett and J. Fishkin (eds), Philosophy, Politics, and Society, pp 97–133. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Awareness on Political Issues

17

Memoli, Vincenzo. 2011. “How Does Political Knowledge Shape Support for Democracy? Some Research Based on the Italian Case,” Bulletin of Italian Politics, 3 (1): 79–102. Nie, Norman H., G. Bingham Powell, and Kenneth Prewitt. 1968. “Social Structure and Political Participation: Developmental Relationships,” American Political Science Review, 63 (2): 361–78. Niemi, Richard and Jane Junn. 1998. Civic Education: What Makes Students Learn. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Putnam, Robert. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon and Schuster.

2 Interest in Politics and Political Participation Kinjal Sampat and Jyoti Mishra

T

his chapter examines the levels of interest and participation of youth in politics. It studies the relationship shared by interest and participation, and identifies patterns, through attitudinal and demographic categories that implicate political interest and levels of participation. Four distinct questions are analyzed in this chapter. While the assessment of interest is based on a single question, participation is interpreted as a spectrum ranging from electoral to non-electoral involvement in political issues. Three separate questions inquire the frequency of participation of respondents in activities such as collecting funds for candidates for elections, attending election meetings and rallies, and taking part in campaigning by distributing pamphlets. “Did you vote in the 2009 Lok Sabha election?” is used to identify voters from nonvoters. In addition to this, voter turnout as reported by the Election Commission is used to posit more generalized observations. Apart from these questions, respondents were asked whether they had participated in any protests or demonstrations. The question on interest is respondents’ self-reported level of interest. Comparisons are drawn from previous studies of the

Interest in Politics and Political Participation

19

Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) and from the Global Barometer Surveys, wherever deemed necessary.

Background Gabriel Almond and Sidney Verba posit political interest and political participation as not only connected but that which implicate each other (Almond and Verba 1963). Borrowing this framework, the analysis on both these aspects—interest and participation—has been included within this same chapter. “Political participation is a part of microlevel analysis of political behavior which affects the behavior of macro political system” (Milbrath 1965). Hence, a major portion of the chapter is dedicated toward analyzing youth involvement in political activities and unearthing the attitudinal differences between the politically involved groups versus the politically passive ones. The range of political activities analyzed in this chapter includes electoral to extra-electoral political participation, that is, from forms such as voting, membership in political party/student wing of any political party, campaign activity, collecting funds, and attending election meetings and rallies, to taking interest in politics through discussions on various political issues and taking part in protests/demonstrations related to a social or political issue other than elections. Milbrath measured political participation on an active–inactive continuum and divided population into three categories on the basis of political participation: “apathetic,” “spectators,” and “gladiators”.1 Political activity generally can be graded into quantities: some persons do more of a given thing than other persons. They may engage in an activity with greater frequency and regularity. Some persons are almost totally inactive; some are active in one type of behavior but passive in other; some are active in a wide variety of behavior. Inactivity may be thought of as a zero or base point from which quantities of action can be measured. (ibid.: 9)

20 Kinjal Sampat and Jyoti Mishra

Taking this as the starting point, the sphere of political participation is analyzed along multiple dimensions rather than a simple scale. These dimensions include participation through voting, participation in electoral activities other than voting, and extra-electoral political participation such as in protests and demonstrations. Cliff Zukin and his colleagues reject the general claim of youth disengagement with politics. Instead they claim that the presentday youth are more engaged in American politics (Zukin et al. 2006). On the contrary, the World Development Report 2007 (World Bank 2006) reveals that young people might be growing less interested in politics and more disaffected from mainstream institutions in high-income countries and many middle-income countries, but in low-income countries, interest in politics and political affairs is definitely increasing. The report also reveals that youth interest in politics has been rising in low-income countries such as China, India, and Nigeria. The study presented that the proportion of young people in most middle- and high-income countries who think that politics is important is about half that of older age groups. But in China, India, Nigeria, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe, young people are at least as interested in politics as older people. In Indonesia and the Islamic Republic of Iran, interest in politics is highest among the young, and declines with age (ibid.). In India, the voter turnout trend shows a consistent increase over the years. In the 1990s, India witnessed a major participatory upsurge among the socially underprivileged, across caste, economic class, gender, or localities. This phenomenon was termed as the second democratic upsurge (Yadav 2000).2 However, youth voter turnout over the years has remained fairly consistent. If other indications, such as the recent movement against corruption in the political and bureaucratic institutions in India, launched by Anna Hazare in 2011, are to be considered then a slightly different story seems to emerge. Anticorruption activist Anna Hazare’s consistent appeal to the youth to join him in his fight against corruption and the concentration of the media on the participation of this age group indicate the importance of youth in the political realm of the country. These kinds of

Interest in Politics and Political Participation

21

movements present themselves as a platform other than that of electoral participation where the relationship of youth and politics can be understood. This swing, from youth apathy toward politics to youth enthusiasm toward politics is not new to India. Some of these are evidence-based claims whereas others mere speculation. However, keeping this global context in the background, the theme of youth and politics has been explored in this chapter through their self-reported interest levels and participation. Participation has been explored through three distinct dimensions: voting, participation in election-related activities, and participation in extra-electoral spaces such as protests and movements. How is youth involvement with politics distinct from that of other respondents? How different are the youth from one another regarding their political attitudes and interest? And are there underlying, consistent demographic and attitudinal trends dictating political involvement? These are some of the questions that have been systematically explored in this chapter.

Interest in Politics The analysis in this section is based on the question that asked the respondents about their degree of interest in politics. The responses to this question were collected in one of the four discrete categories: Great deal of interest, Some interest, No interest at all, and No opinion (the last being responses from those who refused to answer this question). For the sake of efficient readability, the category of Great deal of interest has been reported as High interest, and Some interest is reported as Moderate interest, across the chapter. While high interest in politics was reported by only 10 percent of the sample, overall more than 60 percent of the youth have high or moderate level of interest in politics. About one-third of the youth do not have any interest in politics (Table 2.1). Variations across age categories suggest that the youth, compared to other respondents, report more interest in politics.

22 Kinjal Sampat and Jyoti Mishra

In other words, interest in politics declines with age. Of respondents belonging to the above 33 years age group, 7 percent have high interest in politics vis-à-vis 10 percent of youth who report high interest in politics (Table 2.2). Over 60 percent of the Indian youth are interested in politics as compared to a little over 50 percent of those belonging to the older age group. Not only are youth in the same time and the same space more interested in politics than the others, over time too, the youth’s reported interest in politics seems to be on the rise. Table 2.3 reveals that in 1996, 37 percent of the youth Table 2.1: Level of Political Interest among Youth Great Deal of Interest

Some Interest

No Interest at All

No Opinion

10

52

34

4

Youth

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent. Table 2.2: Youth More Interested in Politics Age Category

High Interest

Moderate Interest

Youth

10

52

Others

7

44

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent. Table 2.3: Interest in Politics on the Rise among Youth Years

Youth Interested in Politics

1996

37

2004

41

2009

44

2011

62

Sources: National Election Studies (1996, 2004, and 2009); Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

Interest in Politics and Political Participation

23

were interested in politics and this number has been consistently rising. While interest in politics among the youth is rising, the explanation for interest is not exhausted by age itself. Indian youth is not a homogeneous group. Like all other categories, it is framed by the attitudinal and demographic differences found among its members. Age, locality, education, gender, economic background, and media exposure are some factors which are analyzed here so as to understand the nuances among the youth. Overall, according to our data, more men, than women, admit to having interest in politics. About 45 percent of young women are interested in politics whereas 76 percent of young men say that they are interested in politics. This difference in the level of interest in politics by gender remains consistent in spite of interventions from education and media. Neither education nor media exposure equalizes the level of interest among men and women. This gap found among the two genders regarding interest level in politics is further widened when figures for High interest in politics are considered exclusively. About 4 percent of young women, vis-à-vis 15 percent of young men, admit to having a great deal of interest in politics. Across locality, women are less interested in politics as compared to men. Locality does not seem to make a significant difference. When compared to their rural counterparts, however, both men and women in urban areas admit to higher levels of interest in politics (Table 2.4). Table 2.4 is in coherence with the trend observed in an attitudinal question on women and politics, that was not a part of Table 2.4: Compared to Young Women, More Young Men Interested in Politics Locality

Interested in Politics

Young rural men

74

Young rural women

41

Young urban men

81

Young urban women

46

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

24 Kinjal Sampat and Jyoti Mishra

this study but has been asked in the National Election Studies (NES) series.3 Longitudinal data suggests that a majority of the men and women respondents in the election studies conducted by the CSDS stated that they believe that politics is indeed not meant for women, and over time the proportion of the population stating that they believe that politics is not meant for women has increased, across gender, among both the youth and the others (Table 2.5). In the presence of such an overwhelming attitude against women and politics, the silence or disinterest in politics reported by women needs a more nuanced reading. Rather than just a simple reporting of disinterest there is a possibility of it being a case of reiteration of social norms. Establishing the relationship among these two variables is beyond the scope due to technical limitations. However, in the light of this evidence, women’s disinterest in politics needs a more careful interpretation. Education shares a positive relationship with interest in politics, as nonliterate youth are less likely to admit to having interest in politics. If we look at the continuum of education level and interest in politics, we observe that it ranges from 35 percent of the nonliterate being interested in politics to 78 percent of higher-educated youth being interested in politics. Education also does seem to have a positive relationship with interest in politics across gender categories. Across all education categories, more men are interested in politics than their male counterparts who are not interested in politics. The only exception to this is nonliterate men, where men interested and not interested in politics are exactly equal. Among the high-school- and Table 2.5: Support Increasing for the Idea “Politics is not meant for women” “Politics not meant for women” Young men Young women

1996

2004

2009

Agree

16

26

31

Disagree

76

68

58

9

19

24

81

71

59

Agree Disagree

Sources: National Election Studies. Note: All figures are in percent.

Interest in Politics and Political Participation

25

college-educated young women, there is a reversal of a trend; women interested in politics among the moderately and highly educated, exceed women not interested in politics within the same education categories. This is not the case for nonliterate and primary-pass women. Overall, across education levels, men are comparatively more interested in politics. One of the most striking observations is that women with higher education also report more refusal to answer. The categories among women which report the highest No Opinion are the college-educated and high-school-pass women. This is not only in contrast to men but to the general hypothesis that education makes an individual more opinionated (Table 2.6). Education has an effect on interest in politics, across localities, especially for the two categories at the extreme: nonliterate and college-educated. As we can see in Table 2.7, the college-educated, in both rural and urban areas, are equally interested in politics. Nonliterates in rural areas are marginally more interested in politics, when compared to their urban counterparts. However, across the moderate education categories, urban respondents exceed rural in admitting their interest in politics. Also, while at Table 2.6: Political Interest Rises with Education, among Both Young Men and Women

Educational Attainment

Interested in Politics

Not Interested in Politics

Nonliterate young men

49

49

2

Primary-school–pass young men

66

32

2

No Response

High-school–pass young men

75

24

1

College-educated young men

85

15

–

Nonliterate young women

29

64

7

Primary-school–pass young women

32

63

5

High-school–pass young women

49

43

8

College-educated young women

63

27

10

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. “Interested in Politics” includes those “greatly interested” and “somewhat interested.”

26 Kinjal Sampat and Jyoti Mishra Table 2.7: Interest in Politics Similar among College-educated Youth across Localities Locality

Interest in Politics

Rural, nonliterate youth

35

Urban, nonliterate youth

32

Rural, college-educated youth

78

Urban, college-educated youth

79

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

the primary-education level among urban respondents one finds more youth interested in politics as compared to those not interested in politics, this is not the case for rural respondents until they attain a high-school–level education. Hence the cultivation of interest due to education occurs at an earlier stage in urban areas than in rural. While education seems to generate a higher level of interest in politics, its effect is mediated by the respondent’s class. This is to say, as one goes up the ladder of education, there is a rise in the overall interest in politics. However, when comparing respondents within the same education level, the upper-class respondents admit to much higher interest in politics, when compared to the poor respondents. Within the same education category, more than the poor, the rich are likely to be interested in politics. The covariance between frequency of political discussion and interest in politics is established by a statistic—59 percent of the youth who “very frequently” discuss political institutions and actors, and their functioning, are also greatly interested in politics, whereas only 5 percent of the youth who never discuss politics and political institutions report high interest in politics (Table 2.8). Membership of a political party expectedly generates interest in politics, closely followed by membership of student/youth wing. Ninety percent of the youth who are members of political parties are interested in politics. Similarly, 88 percent of the youth who are members of any student/youth wing are interested in politics (Table 2.9).

Interest in Politics and Political Participation

27

Table 2.8: Interest in Politics and Discussions on Politics Discussions on Politics

Moderate Interest

Youth never discuss politics

High Interest

7

5

Youth sometimes discuss politics

26

8

Youth frequently discuss politics

48

29

Youth very frequently discuss politics

20

59

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent. Table 2.9: Members of Political Parties Show Maximum Interest in Politics Membership

Interest in Politics

Political party

94

Student/youth wing

88

Any other union

80

NGO

76

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

Political Participation Does interest in politics lead to political participation? Are interest and participation consistent across attitudinal and demographic categories? Do the same demographic categories—the ones that affect an individual’s interest in politics—affect political participation too? These are some of the overarching issues that are dealt in this section of the chapter. Political participation, in this study, is measured in three distinct forms: participation in terms of voting, participation in election-related activities (such as attending meetings, distributing pamphlets, and collecting funds for parties), and, finally, political participation in terms of extra-electoral participation in protests and demonstrations. A young student leader and former president of the Delhi University Students’ Union, in one of the focus group discussions organized around the theme of youth and politics, said:

28 Kinjal Sampat and Jyoti Mishra Youth have limited interest in politics. They are not much aware about political issues. Even in university elections, youth do not discuss national issues; rather, they are more concerned about their personal problems and discuss those. In broader terms, the youth are not interested in politics and this leads to a low level of political participation. I don’t think the youth participate in politics…they are willing to change the society but not through being a part of politics, rather through opposing it.

This observation in some way reflects an opinion often reiterated regarding youth in India, their interest in politics, and their involvement. However, time series data reveals that youth political participation in extra-electoral activities has increased over the years. The latter aspect of the observation—about youth participating through opposing politics—has been addressed by this chapter. Instead of considering it as outside the political spectrum, it is very much considered as part of it. Youth engagement with political spaces outside the formal parliamentary and electoral has been considered as political participation in this study. Political Participation through Voting

India is deemed to be the biggest participative democracy. Voting occurs at three levels—union, state, and local governments—and is one of the direct forms of political participation. Voting presents itself as one of the ideal measures for assessing the political, for various reasons: it is not a localized phenomenon and hence is applicable to respondents across the country, it is voluntary in India, logistical arrangements for this form of participation are ensured by the state, and participation through voting is an essential feature of this form of democracy. Youth consistently have recorded a lower voter turnout than the overall turnout. There is no significant increase in youth voter turnout over the years. Since the very beginning, youth voter turnout has been lower than the all-India turnout as well as other voter turnouts (Table 2.10). What is noteworthy here is that within the category of youth, there appear to be two distinct trends. The younger segment of the youth, that is, 18–25-year-olds, have a

Interest in Politics and Political Participation

29

Table 2.10: Turnout among Different Age Groups over the Years Age Category

1996

1998

1999

2004

2009

18–25 years

54

63

57

52

54

26–33 years

58

64

62

59

60

18–33 years

56

63

61

56

57

34+ years

60

61

60

60

59

All-India turnout

58

62

60

58

58

Sources: Election Commission of India (for all-India turnout); National Election Studies (for young and adult turnouts). Note: All figures are in percent.

turnout lower than the overall as well as compared to the others (34+ years). However, the more mature segment among the youth (between 26 and 33 years old) has most times recorded the highest voter turnout, exceeding the senior as well as overall voter turnout levels. Worldwide, many industrialized countries have experienced a decline in voter participation. In France, the voter turnout for parliamentary elections has fallen from nearly 80 percent of registered voters in 1945 to 55 percent in 2012. Voter participation in the United Kingdom (UK) parliamentary elections fell from 73 percent in 1945 to 59 percent in 2001, before climbing to 66 percent in 2010. In the United States, voter turnout for the presidential elections fell from 87 percent in 1972 to 70 percent in 2008.4 The youth vote too is decreasing. The UK Electoral Commission (2002) concluded that the low turnout rate in the 2001 election was primarily due to the youth not voting. In the United States, about 40 percent of the youth between the ages of 18 and 29 voted in the 2000 presidential election; however, the 2008 presidential election witnessed an increase in turnout with 51 percent youth between the ages of 18 and 29 casting their votes (Kirby and Kawashima-Ginsberg 2009). In this global context of democracy and participation in representative democracy, the Indian electorate (the youth especially) is yet to emerge as a political category. The United States, unlike other industrialized nations, has been witnessing a consistent rise in voter turnout. The increase

30 Kinjal Sampat and Jyoti Mishra

is a continuation of the trend observed in the 2004 and 2008 elections. While young people increased their turnout significantly in 2008, other voters voted at lower rates than in 2004 and only slightly above their 2000 level.5 Also in the 1972 general election, men and women were equally likely to go to the polls in the United States; however, over the past 30 years, the gap between male and female turnout in presidential elections has widened. By 1992, 54 percent of women aged 18–29 years voted while only 50 percent of men did so. In 2008, this difference continued to widen to nearly eight percentage points, although both genders marked significant gains in turnout over the 2000 election. In contrast to the United States, Indian young women consistently display lower voter turnout as compared to Indian men. However, the difference in voter turnout between young men and young women has been fluctuating in various Lok Sabha elections. In the 1996 Lok Sabha election, the difference between the turnout level of both the genders was 15 percentage points, which reduced by one percentage point in 1998. In 1999, the difference between the men’s and women’s voter turnouts was about 18 percentage points. Since the 2004 Lok Sabha election, this gap has been shrinking, from 18 percent in 1999 to 12 percent in the 2004 election, and a mere 4 percent in the 2009 Lok Sabha election. The 2009 Lok Sabha election was probably the only one where the difference between men’s and women’s voter turnouts could be termed marginal (Table 2.11). Across different countries, urbanization shares a different relationship with voter turnout. In the West and in India, till the 1960s it was assumed that electoral turnout and urbanization shared a positive relationship (Monroe 1977). Over the years, in the case of India, this has not only been rejected but a complete reversal of this trend has been empirically reported. Urban areas tend to register lower voter turnout than rural areas. Low political participation in urban areas is reported in electoral as well as extra-electoral political spheres: voting, election activities, and protests. The gap in voter turnout between the rural and urban areas has remained consistent over the years, although in 2009, the gap narrowed. However, over the years there has been a rise

Interest in Politics and Political Participation

31

Table 2.11: Turnout among Young Men More Compared to Young Women Lok Sabha Election

Young Men

Young Women

1996

63

48

1998

71

57

1999

70

52

2004

62

50

2009

59

55

2009*

56

50

Sources: National Election Studies; Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: All figures are in percent. * Voter turnout in selected constituencies in Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Table 2.12: Turnout among Rural Youth More Compared to Urban Youth Locality

1996

1998

1999

2004

2009

Rural youth

59

67

62

59

58

Urban youth

49

54

54

52

55

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

in the electoral turnout of urban youth. This is in tandem with their rise in interest in politics over the years (Table 2.12). The overall voter turnout in selected constituencies where young candidates contested in the 15th Lok Sabha election and were either winner or runner-up was 59 percent. Even in constituencies where young candidates were winners, others’ participation in voting was considerably higher than youth. The overall voter turnout across constituencies, where a young leader was a winner, was about 57 percent. However, the overall turnout of youth across these 79 constituencies was much less than the average turnout of youth nationally and much below the turnout of others in these constituencies. Youth recorded an average turnout of 36 percent as opposed to 63 percent average voter turnout of others in these 79 constituencies. What is noteworthy here is the fact that the voter turnout of others is much higher in constituencies where a young leader won as compared

32 Kinjal Sampat and Jyoti Mishra

to the national voter turnout of others. The popularly debated and rather accepted relationships between youth electorate and young leaders, and the mobilizing of the youth through youth leaders, are as yet not established. Youths’ rising interest in politics and their abstinence from voting, in some sense, presents a paradoxical picture which leaves space for theorizing the political engagement of youth in a nuanced way. The major reason for not voting, as reported in the study, was the absence of voters from the constituency on the day of elections. Thirty-five percent of young voters were out of station on the day of voting. Other than this reason, 19 percent of them were not able to vote because they did not have identity cards or identity proof for voting. Ten percent of young voters did not cast their votes as they were not interested in voting or did not feel like voting. Only 2 percent of young voters did not vote due to lack of good choice to cast their votes (Table 2.13). The belief in the efficacy of vote definitely makes a difference when it comes to voting. Those respondents who think that their vote makes a difference are more likely to report that they voted, as compared to those who do not think their vote makes a difference. Not only that, almost an equal number of respondents, who do not think that their vote makes a difference, are likely to not vote as compared to those who vote. However, more than 50 percent of those who did not believe that their vote made any difference reported that they voted in the 2009 election (Table 2.14). Hence, while belief in efficacy matters, a substantial percent of those who do not believe in vote efficacy report that they voted. Table 2.13: Main Reasons for Not Voting (2009) Reasons for Not Voting

Out of Station

No Identity Card or Identity Proof

18–25 years

35

19

26–33 years

41

12

34+ years

31

9

Source: National Election Study (2009). Note: All figures are in percent.

Interest in Politics and Political Participation

33

Table 2.14: Less the Belief in Vote’s Efficacy, Less the Urge to Vote Voted in 2009 Lok Sabha Election

Did Not Vote in 2009 Lok Sabha Election

Vote has an effect

64

36

Vote has no effect

51

49

Value of Vote

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

Participation in Election-related Activities

Participation is not merely voting in elections; rather it is wider in nature and scope. Participation in activities related to elections, such as collecting funds for the candidate, attending election meetings/rallies, taking part in the election campaign, or distributing pamphlets, has been increasing over time for both the young and the others. Around 28 percent of Indian youth voters report participating in electoral activities other than voting, and this number has been rising over the years (Table 2.15).6 There is a marginal difference between the youth and the others in terms of participation in election-related activities. Nevertheless, the youth report comparatively higher electoral participation (Table 2.16). Fourteen percent of others are included in the high participation category in election-related activities whereas 17 percent of youth report a high level of participation in election-related activities. Participation of youth in election-related activities has been rising marginally. The present study registers a spike in reported participation in election-related activities. Since this study was Table 2.15: Sizeable Number of Youth Participate in Electoral Activities

Youth

No Participation

Moderate Participation

High Participation

73

10

17

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

34 Kinjal Sampat and Jyoti Mishra Table 2.16: Electoral Participation of Youth Marginally Higher Age Category

No Participation in Election-related Activities

Participation in Election-related Activities

18–25 years

72

28

26–33 years

73

27

34+ years

73

27

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Moderate Participation and High Participation categories are merged for Participation in Election-related Activities. Table 2.17: Electoral Participation of Youth Rising Steadily Year

Moderate Participation

High Participation

1998

21

9

1999

21

10

2004

24

9

2009

17

11

2009

10

17

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. Participation in election-related activities in selected 14 constituencies in Youth and Politics Survey 2011. 2. All figures are in percent.

only conducted in purposively selected constituencies, this observation cannot be generalized (Table 2.17). However, as with interest in politics, specific patterns can be observed when sociodemographic variables are appropriated. Young male respondents report to be more participative than young female respondents in election-related activities. Only 4 percent of young women participated in election-related activities, which is substantially less compared to the 27 percent of young men. Locality produces a very interesting and paradoxical picture. Nineteen percent of rural youth participate in electionrelated activities, which is seven percentage points higher than urban youth. While overall more urban youth admitted having

Interest in Politics and Political Participation

35

interest in politics, when it came to participating in electoral activities, the ones in rural areas exceeded the ones in urban areas by a considerable margin. Having interest in politics translates differently for respondents across localities. The interest translates into participation in electoral activities for youth located in rural areas, whereas interest of urban youth is restricted and does not result in political action. Overall, as mentioned earlier, about 28 percent of the youth participate in some degree in electoral activities. Forty-one percent of the rural youth having interest in politics participate in election-related activities, substantially higher than the overall and urban-youth participation levels. On the other hand, 25 percent urban youth having interest in politics participate in electoral activities (Table 2.18). Interest in politics has a similar effect on electoral participation rate for women as well. While overall about 7 percent of women participate in varying degrees in electoral activities, this number doubles up to 14 percent among women interested in politics. One of the most interesting findings regarding electoral participation is the relationship between economic class and locality. The rural, upper class is the most active category of people participating in election-related activities. A little less than 50 percent of upper-class youth from rural areas report participating in election-related activities. On the other hand, the urban, upper class reports the lowest levels of electoral participation among all other categories. In urban areas, the middle classes report the highest levels of participation. About 23 percent of the urban, middle-class youth respondents reported participating in election-related activities. Urban poor exceed urban upper class in terms of participation. However, across all Table 2.18: Interest in Politics Higher among Rural Youth Compared to Urban Youth Locality

Participation in Electoral Activities

Rural youth interested in politics

41

Urban youth interested in politics

25

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

36 Kinjal Sampat and Jyoti Mishra Table 2.19: Participation in Electoral Activities More among Rural Youth Locality

Electoral Participation

Rural, upper-class youth

48

Urban, upper-class youth

15

Rural, poor youth

20

Urban, poor youth

17

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

class categories, the participation levels of rural respondents are much higher than their urban counterparts (Table 2.19). However, within the same economic class, education seems to have a positive impact on participation. This impact is felt greatly among the upper class. While for all other classes their levels of participation increase with the gradual increase in education, this is not completely true for respondents belonging to the poor class. Among the respondents belonging to the poor class, the college-educated, followed by nonliterates, are the most participative categories. Overall the moderately educated ones participate less as compared to the nonliterate ones. Reiterating what has been said earlier, overall education has a positive impact on overall electoral participation. However, when one looks at this large encompassing finding through the prism of gender, a whole new trend emerges. While education greatly aids in increasing electoral participation for men, the same does not hold true for women. In fact, education has a negative impact on the electoral participation of women. As is evident from Table 2.20, there is a difference of minus five percentage points between participation levels of college-educated women vis-à-vis nonliterate women. The positive impact of education on electoral participation of men and its negative impact on women results in the widening of gap between the participation levels of men and women as one goes up the ladder of education. The difference between the participation levels of nonliterate men and nonliterate women is about 14 percentage points, which increases for educated respondents—a difference of 38

Interest in Politics and Political Participation

37

Table 2.20: Irrespective of Education, Electoral Participation Low among Young Women Compared to Young Men Level of Educational Attainment

Participation in Election-related Activities

Nonliterate young men

28

Nonliterate young women

14

High-school-pass young men

40

High-school-pass young women College-educated young men College-educated young women

8 47 9

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

percentage points between participation levels of educated men and educated women. Education has contradictory effects across localities as far as participation in election-related activities is concerned. While attaining education also makes rural respondents more participative in election-related activities, this is not so for their urban counterparts. The most participative group among the urban respondents is those who are not literate. While education has an inverse relationship with electoral participation among urban respondents, it shares a direct one with rural participants as far as their participation in election-related activities is concerned. The most nonparticipative of the lot are the urban, collegeeducated youth. As a result the difference in participation levels between college-educated youth in rural versus urban areas is the highest (Table 2.21). Media exposure has a positive impact on electoral participation across classes; however, the magnitude of the effect is much lower compared to its effect on interest in politics. The point one is trying to make is about the limited efficacy of media exposure in terms of political mobilization, or participation across classes and education levels. While exposure to any degree of media instantaneously increases the respondents’ interest in politics, participation in electoral activities presents itself as a lot more complex phenomenon (Table 2.22).

38 Kinjal Sampat and Jyoti Mishra Table 2.21: Electoral Participation More among Educated Rural Youth Compared to Educated Urban Youth Locality

Participation in Election-related Activities

Rural, nonliterate youth

18

Urban, nonliterate youth

21

Rural, primary-pass youth

21

Urban, primary-pass youth

17

Rural, high-school-educated youth

28

Urban, high-school-educated youth

24

Rural, college-educated youth

46

Urban, college-educated youth

15

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent. Table 2.22: Media Exposure Has a Positive Impact on Interest in Politics and Electoral Participation Economic Class Upper-class youth not exposed to media

Interested in Politics

Electoral Participation

8

8

Upper-class youth exposed to media

81

43

Middle-class youth not exposed to media

26

6

Middle-class youth exposed to media

77

37

Lower-class youth not exposed to media

29

16

Lower-class youth exposed to media

70

27

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

Membership of any political or nonpolitical organization also affects the level of electoral participation. Membership of political party expectedly leads to participation in election-related activities; members of unions too participate more in electionrelated activities. However, what is interesting is that student/ youth wings fail to generate very high levels of participation (Table 2.23).

Interest in Politics and Political Participation

39

Table 2.23: Members of Student and Youth Wings Not Very Participative in Electoral Activities Membership

Participation in Election-related Activities

Political party

68

Student/youth wing

39

Any union

59

NGO

51

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

Participation in Protest and Demonstration

People participate in various kinds of electoral activities ranging from attending election meetings to directly supporting candidates by helping him/her in various ways. However, this kind of participation is generally election-specific and hence largely time bound. There are also other extra-electoral forms of participation which do not necessarily occur during election times. These activities are public protests and demonstrations. This form of participation has caught popular and academic attention since last year. Globally, the fight for democracy in a lot of West Asian countries, what has been popularly called the “Arab spring,” and the “Occupy” movement, which began in the United States, are contemporary landmark movements of these kinds. India itself witnessed a similar movement in 2011 on the issue of support for the implementation of the anticorruption bill. The Lokpal movement, as it popularly came to be known, reportedly witnessed participation from various quarters of the society. What made these movements distinct at another level was that all of them were speculated to be largely represented by the youth (“Rage of Angels,” India Today, December 23, 2011). Table 2.24 shows that 12 percent of the respondents had participated in protest and demonstration related to political and social issues. There is only one percentage point difference between youth and others in terms of participation in protests and demonstrations.

40 Kinjal Sampat and Jyoti Mishra

Very few women in rural areas reported participating in any protests or demonstrations. Cities and urban areas seem to provide for women the space for extra-electoral participation, since more women in urban areas reported to have been a part of a demonstration or a protest. On the other hand, young men in rural areas consistently exceed youth in urban areas in any form of political participation including this one (Table 2.25). Media exposure in rural areas shares a positive relationship with participation in protests and demonstrations. However, the impact of media exposure on the participation levels of urban respondents is not of the same magnitude. The difference between the participation levels of those not exposed to the media and those with media exposure in urban areas is not very high (Table 2.26). Education seems to be providing men political spaces that allow for the politics of dissent. The participation of men in extraelectoral protests and demonstrations consistently and markedly rises with education; however, the same is not true for women. Table 2.24: Participation in Protests Low, among Both Youth and Others Age Category

Participated in Protest/Demonstration

Youth

12

Others

11

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures in percent. Table 2.25: Participation in Protests Higher among Young Men Compared to Young Women Locality

Participation in Protests and Demonstrations

Rural young men Rural young women Urban young men Urban young women Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

20 3 12 8

Interest in Politics and Political Participation

41

Table 2.26: Greater the Exposure to Media, Higher the Participation in Protests Locality

Participation in Protests and Demonstrations

Rural youth not exposed to media

3

Rural youth highly exposed to media

27

Urban youth not exposed to media

10

Urban youth highly exposed to media

15

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent. Table 2.27: Higher the Level of Education Attainment, Higher the Participation in Protests Level of Educational Attainment

Participation in Protests and Demonstrations

Nonliterate young Men

7

Nonliterate young women

6

College-educated young men College-educated young women

22 5

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

The percentage of women across educational categories remains more or less similar at around 5 percent (Table 2.27). The space of extra-electoral participation, according to our study, seems to be an elitist one which witnesses the highest participation from the rich in rural areas and the middle classes in urban areas. The participation of the poor is alike across localities and is below 5 percent. Class in rural area shares a positive and linear relationship with participation in protests and demonstrations. While demographic categories of locality, gender, class, and education help locate the social sites of active respondents, it is the attitudinal categories of political orientation of individuals which provides the insight into the political attitudes of these youth. Participation in protests and demonstrations increases more than nine times when comparing those who are not at all

42 Kinjal Sampat and Jyoti Mishra

interested and those who are highly interested in politics. Among those who are absolutely not interested in politics, about 4 percent of youth among them admit that they have participated in a protest or demonstration. On the other hand, 37 percent of the youth who are highly interested in politics participate in protests and demonstrations (Table 2.28). Members of political parties are most likely to have participated in protests and demonstrations—42 percent of youth who are members of political parties participate in protests and demonstration (Table 2.29). About 25 percent of youth who are members of student/youth wing of a political party had participative in protest and demonstrations. On the other hand, youth who are members of any union are more participative than youth who are members of political student wings/parties. In fact, members of political student wings are the least participative. While expectedly the participation of nongovernmental organization (NGO) members in election-related activities is low, slightly Table 2.28: Greater the Interest in Politics, Greater the Participation in Protests and Demonstrations Interest in Politics

Participated in Protest and Demonstration

No interest in politics at all

4

Moderate interest in politics

12

High interest in politics

37

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent. Table 2.29: Participation in Protests Highest among Political Party and Union Members Membership

Participation in Protest and Demonstration

Political party

42

Student/youth wing

25

Any other union

41

NGO

35

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

Interest in Politics and Political Participation

43

Table 2.30: Higher the Participation in Electoral Activities, Higher the Participation in Protests Participation in Election-related Activities

Participated in Protest and Demonstration

Never participated

4

Low participation

24

High participation

39

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

more than one-third of them have participated in protests and demonstrations. Participation in electoral activities leads to participation in protests and demonstrations. There is a rather huge overlap between those who have participated in electoral activities and those who have participated in protests and demonstrations. About 39 percent of the youth who record a high participation in election-related activities also record the highest participation in protests and demonstrations, whereas the number decreases drastically to 4 percent of the youth who have never participated in electoral activities, participate in protests and demonstrations (Table 2.30). This is not surprising as unions in India and across the world are highly politicized, not only ideologically but also in terms of their affinity and allegiance to particular political parties; the most participative groups in terms of participation in protests and demonstrations are either members of unions or of political parties.

Conclusion The aim of this chapter was to demographically and attitudinally locate youth with regard to their self-reported interest and participation in politics. The sociodemographic variables used in this chapter may not be the key explanatory variables to explain political behavior of the youth but they are appropriated

44 Kinjal Sampat and Jyoti Mishra

selectively based on the patterns they create. It is a descriptive attempt, laying down covariances between attitudinal, behavior, and demographic variables as observed in the study. The analysis in this chapter systematically establishes that the relationship between political interest and political participation is not straightforward. Both these phenomena—interest and participation—have members from two distinct geographic and socioeconomic locations. However, over the years, on the whole one witnesses an increase in interest and in participation in certain political activities. Secondly, voting in elections is only one of the indicators of the political engagement of the youth. It is not the best indication of youth political engagement. Indian youth’s engagement with electoral politics is definitely not leaning toward apathy. Returning back to the typology of political groups as presented by Almond and Verba, youth in India cannot be considered a “parochial” group isolated from politics and does not take interest and participate in politics. But as per the levels of participation observed, Indian youth cannot be placed within “participant” group either (which actively participates in politics and is keenly interested in politics). Rather we can place the Indian youth in the category of “subject” group which is aware of government and expecting more from government but their level of active participation in voting and electoral activities is many times low or comparable to other age groups and has never been anywhere near the threshold of high participation. The politicization of youth and the recognition of youth as a political category are as yet an emerging phenomenon.

Notes and References Notes 1.

2.

According to Milbrath (1965), apathetic are low participants, spectators are medium participants, and gladiators are high participants in political activities. Yogendra Yadav (2000) introduced the “second democratic upsurge” thesis where he revealed that since the 1990s the underprivileged

Interest in Politics and Political Participation

3. 4.

5.

6.

45

section of the Indian society has been taking more interest in politics and voting. National Election Studies is a series of surveys conducted by the CSDS in 1996, 1998, 1999, 2004, and 2009. See data presented by the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. Retrieved from http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?id=77#pres. Data on youth turnout in US elections is from The Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement. Retrieved from http://www.civicyouth.org. Index of participation in election-related activities: This index has been formed on the basis of responses collected for Q9a, Q9b, and Q9c— collecting funds for the candidate, attending election meetings/rallies and taking part in the election campaign/distributing pamphlets respectively. The answer choices provided to the respondents for each of these questions were “Yes,” “No,” “Don’t remember,” and “No opinion.” The responses to all these three questions were collated and divided into three categories: “No participation,” “Moderate participation,” and “High participation.” Participation in any two out of the three activities or all three activities assessed here was considered as “High” participation. Participation in any one out of all three activities was considered as “Moderate” participation. The category of “No” participation is self-explanatory. All those who responded whether in the negative or did not recall participating in any activity form the “No participation” category.

References Almond, Gabriel and Sidney Verba. 1963. The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Electoral Commission (United Kingdom). 2002. Voter Engagement and Young People (research report). Retrieved from http://www. electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/electoral_commission_ pdf_file/0019/16093/youngpplvoting_6597-6188__E__N__S__W__.pdf. Kirby, Emily Hoban and Kei Kawashima-Ginsberg. 2009. The Youth Vote in 2008. The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement. Retrieved from http://www.civicyouth.org/PopUps/ FactSheets/FS_youth_Voting_2008_updated_6.22.pdf. Milbrath, L. W. 1965. Political Participation: How and Why Do People Get Involved in Politics? Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.

46 Kinjal Sampat and Jyoti Mishra Monroe, Alan D. 1977. “Urbanism and Voter Turnout: A Note on Some Unexpected Findings,” American Journal of Political Science, 21 (1): 71–78. World Bank. 2006. World Development Report 2007: Development and the Next Generation. Washington, DC: The World Bank and Oxford University Press. Yadav, Yogendra. 2000. “Understanding the Second Democratic Upsurge: Trends of Bahujan Participation in Electoral Politics in the 1990s,” in Francine R. Frankel, Rajeev Bhargava and Zoya Hasan (eds), Transforming India: Social and Political Dynamics of Democracy, pp. 120–45. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Zukin, Cliff, Scott Keeter, Molly Andolina, Krista Jenkins and Michael X. Delli Carpini. 2006. A New Engagement? Political Participation, Civic Life, and the Changing American Citizens. New York: Oxford University Press.

3 The Voting Pattern Sanjay Kumar

I

s there a political party in India which could be seen as the party of the youth? Do the youth vote for a particular political party more than other parties? While all political parties, especially in recent years, have been making attempts to mobilize the youth, realizing that the young electors constitute a sizeable proportion of the total electorate, it is difficult to say that there is any political party which could be seen as the party of the young. In the race for mobilizing the youth for greater political participation, the Congress took the lead with Rahul Gandhi spearheading the effort. Not only has Gandhi appealed to the youth in most of his speeches, but he has also tried to bring them into politics by conducting Youth Congress elections in various states when he was in-charge. Until the 2009 Lok Sabha election, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the Congress’s main opponent nationally, did not focus much on mobilizing the youth, but the party seems to have changed its strategy and is now wooing the young voters of India, with Narendra Modi leading the party in this direction. The Gujarat chief minister makes sure that he addresses the youth in most of his speeches, with the message that they are the future of this country. The regional parties are also eyeing the youth vote and making their own efforts to mobilize the young voters.

48 Sanjay Kumar

The decision by the Samajwadi Party to make Akhilesh Yadav the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh could be seen as a part of this strategy. But have these attempts brought any change in the youth’s level of political participation and their preference for political parties? To answer this question, let us look at how the young have voted during different national elections during the last decade and a half. The Congress, to a great extent, has succeeded in portraying itself as a party which represents the youth, but the youth does not seem to have reciprocated by indicating a clear preference for the Congress party over other political parties, or voting for the Congress in bigger numbers now compared to the past. While it is difficult to say whether the Congress lost its vote bank among the young voters during the 1990s and in recent years compared to the past, it is clear that the party did not receive disproportionately higher votes from the young voters compared to non-youth or other voters in Lok Sabha elections held since1996. The vote share of the Congress among the young voters remained more or less the same as its national vote share. At times the party got more votes amongst voters of the age group 34 years and above, compared to the youth. On the other hand, although the BJP is not hugely popular among the young voters, those mostly from the upper castes and urban areas have played an important role in the electoral success of the BJP during the last one decade. While the overall vote share of the BJP has declined to below 20 percent (18.8 percent), the BJP received more votes from the youth voters compared to non-youth voters. When in college and in university, the young minds get attracted toward the Left parties (the Communist Party of India and the Communist Party of India [Marxist]), and many young students even join the youth wings of Left parties. But when it comes to voting in national- or statelevel elections, the young voter does not seem to vote for the Left parties in much bigger numbers, barring a few states of course. Findings from the studies indicate that the Left parties do not seem to be getting more votes amongst the youth as compared to older voters. There is hardly any difference in the vote share of the Left parties among the young voters and others. The Bahujan Samaj Party’s (BSP) vote share has increased during the last

The Voting Pattern

49

few elections, both in national elections and in state assembly elections (particularly in Uttar Pradesh), but this is not because the youth have voted more for the BSP in recent years. Studies indicate that the BSP’s support base is evenly increasing, both amongst the young voters as well as amongst the other voters, although it is concentrated more amongst the Dalit youth compared to youth from other communities (Table 3.1). These are some interesting trends of voting amongst young voters during the last decade and a half, and this chapter will now analyze in detail the recent trends and voting choices of the youth in various Lok Sabha elections during this period. During the last five Lok Sabha elections, the Congress has generally got more votes amongst voters who are above 34 years of age compared to the young voters, although the proportion of votes for the Congress amongst the young voters is only marginally higher compared to the proportion among other voters. But there is a big gender difference in the vote for the Congress amongst the young voters. Findings of the National Election Studies (NES) indicate that the Congress has been more popular amongst young women compared to young men. In other words, young women have voted for the Congress in a slightly bigger proportion compared to young men. That said the Congress seems to have lost this advantage amongst the young women voters in the 2009 Lok Sabha election. The BJP has always received more votes amongst the young men compared to young women (Table 3.2). If the Congress has lost its advantage amongst young women voters vis-à-vis young men, the BJP too has lost its advantage amongst the young men compared to young women. The advantage of the vote share of the BJP amongst the young men compared to young women narrowed down from 6 percentage points during the 1996 Lok Sabha election to 2 percentage points during the 2004 Lok Sabha election, and increased marginally by 1 percentage point during the 2009 Lok Sabha election. The Congress not only got more votes amongst young women compared to young men, but it also enjoyed a big advantage over the BJP amongst the young women voters. Similarly, amongst young men, the Congress enjoyed an advantage over the BJP, except in the 1998 and 1999 Lok Sabha elections. During these

3

9

4.7

7.79

Source: National Election Studies. Notes: 1. Vote-share weighted datasets. 2. All figures are in percent.

4

9 4

9 5

7

26 4.2

7.6

23.8

28.3

5

8

26

27

4

8

23

29

5.3

7.9

22.2

26.5

5

8

23

27

6

8

22

26

6.2

7.5

18.8

28.6

6

7

20

28

6

8

18

29

4

26

26

9.1

25.6

25

BSP

19

25.8

Left

22

30

20.3

28

28.8

2009

BJP

2004

Congress

1999

All All All All All Voters Youth Others Voters Youth Others Voters Youth Others Voters Youth Others Voters Youth Others

1998

Parties

1996

Table 3.1: Hardly an Advantage for Any Political Party amongst Young Voters

The Voting Pattern

51

Table 3.2: Congress Has Enjoyed an Advantage over BJP amongst Young Women Voters, but Not amongst Young Men Voters Gender Men Women

1996

1998

1999

2004

2009

2

−4

−4

2

6

10

4

7

6

10

Source: National Election Studies. Notes: 1. Vote-share weighted datasets. 2. All figures are in percent.

two Lok Sabha elections, the BJP got more votes compared to the Congress amongst young men voters, even though overall the Congress had secured more votes compared to the BJP during the 1999 Lok Sabha elections. The Left parties have secured marginally higher votes from young women, while a slightly higher number of young men have voted for the BSP (Table 3.3). Locality, or the type of area where a voter is residing in, has a strong influence on voting patterns of the youth. The young living in villages vote differently compared to their counterparts living in small towns and cities. The difference in voting patterns amongst rural and urban youth is much sharper compared to what we see amongst young women and young men. A study of the voting pattern of the youth since 1996 indicates that the rural youth are more sharply polarized in favor of the Congress, while the urban youth is more inclined to vote for the BJP. The vote for the BJP amongst the urban youth has been higher compared to its vote amongst the rural youth over last several elections, while the support base of the Congress is more or less evenly spread both amongst urban and rural youth. This hardly comes as a surprise as even generally BJP draws greater support amongst the urban voters compared to rural voters. The electoral success of the BJP during the 1990s can be credited to its strong support amongst the urban youth. The urban youth voted for the BJP in large numbers during the 1996, 1998, and 1999 Lok Sabha elections. The BJP enjoyed this advantage amongst the urban young voters till the 2004 Lok Sabha election; since then, the party has lost its popularity amongst the urban young voters. The loss of urban young votes for the BJP translated into gains for regional

27

25

9

5

Congress

BJP

Left

BSP

4

9

19

29

Young Women

5

8

28

24

Young Men

Source: National Election Studies. Notes: 1. Vote-share weighted datasets. 2. All figures are in percent.

Young Men

Parties

1996

Table 3.3: More Young Women Voted for the Congress

4

10

24

28

Young Women

1998

6

7

28

24

Young Men

3

9

23

30

Young Women

1999

5

7

24

26

Young Men

5

8

22

28

Young Women

2004

7

7

21

27

Young Men

5

8

18

28

Young Women

2009

The Voting Pattern

53

parties in different states. The Congress could not muster greater support from the urban young voters during the 2009 Lok Sabha election, in spite of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s effort at mobilizing the youth for greater participation in politics. The Left parties have drawn greater electoral political support amongst the rural youth compared to urban youth, except in 2004, when it received more votes amongst the urban young voters compared to rural young voters. In a sense, the remarkable victory of the Left parties during the 2004 Lok Sabha may be credited to their increased support amongst urban youth. As far as the BSP is concerned, although its support base has increased amongst both rural and urban youth during the last decade, its support has been consistently higher among the rural youth than the urban youth (Table 3.4). The level of educational attainment of the Indian youth seems to be an important factor in shaping the youth’s voting patterns, at least during the past decade or so. Irrespective of the electoral success or setback of the Congress and the BJP, the Congress always had an advantage over the BJP amongst the nonliterate, young voters while the BJP always had an advantage over the Congress amongst the college-educated, young voters. Even though the Congress did not perform well during the 1998 and 1999 Lok Sabha elections, and its overall vote share went down drastically, it still had an advantage over the BJP amongst the uneducated young voters. Similarly, even though the BJP’s vote share declined drastically from 25.6 percent during the 1998 Lok Sabha elections to 22.2 percent during the 2004 Lok Sabha election, the BJP still managed to retain its advantage over the Congress amongst the college-educated, young voters. The party lost this advantage over the Congress in the 2009 Lok Sabha election, but only marginally (Table 3.5). During the past five Lok Sabha elections, the Congress received more votes amongst uneducated youth compared to collegeeducated youths. This is also in conformity with the trend amongst voters above the age of 34 years who are nonliterate, as they also tend to vote more in favor of the Congress compared to the BJP. Although the Congress still manages to get more votes from the uneducated youth compared to the college-educated

27

20

10

5

Congress

BJP

Left

BSP

3

6

28

29

Urban Youth

5

10

24

25

Rural Youth

Source: National Election Studies. Notes: 1. Vote-share weighted datasets. 2. All figures are in percent.

Rural Youth

Parties

1996

1998

3

6

32

26

Urban Youth

Table 3.4: BJP’s Vote Share Has Declined amongst Urban Youth

5

9

25

27

Rural Youth

1999

3

3

28

28

Urban Youth

6

7

22

26

Rural Youth

2004

3

10

26

30

Urban Youth

7

8

20

27

Rural Youth

2009

5

5

20

28

Urban Youth

55

The Voting Pattern

Table 3.5: Congress Has an Advantage over the BJP amongst Uneducated Youth Level of Educational Attainment Nonliterate College

1996

1998

1999

2004

2009

11

7

17

8

11

−15

−19

−13

−5

1

Source: National Election Studies. Notes: 1. Vote-share weighted datasets. 2. All figures are in percent.

youth, the gap between votes for the Congress amongst the uneducated youth and the college-educated youth has narrowed down, because there has been a slight increase in the preference for Congress among the college-educated youth over the years. Barring the 1999 Lok Sabha election, there is hardly any indication of any positive shift amongst the uneducated youth in favor of the Congress between 1996 and 2009. The BJP has been more popular in all the past five elections amongst the educated youth compared to the uneducated youth. That said the party’s vote share among the educated youth has declined sharply over the years, from a high of 40 percent in 1998 to a low of 24 percent in 2009. As far as the BSP is concerned, the party seems to have been more popular in all the past five elections amongst the uneducated youth compared to the college-educated youth, but the gap has narrowed over the years (Table 3.6). In all the five Lok Sabha elections held since 1996, the BJP has remained more popular amongst the educated youth compared to the uneducated youth. The main cause for this is the age of the voters, rather than their educational attainment. Amongst voters with similar levels of educational attainment, the BJP had an advantage amongst the young voters compared to the others, in the 1996 and 1998 Lok Sabha elections. This means that even when the young and the older voters had a similar level of educational attainment, the former voted for the BJP in greater proportion compared to the latter. But the party lost this advantage amongst the educated, young voters after the 1998 Lok Sabha election. In the 2004 and 2009 Lok Sabha elections, the educated others (older voters) voted for the BJP in greater proportion compared to the educated, young voters (Table 3.7).

7

BSP

2

8

38

23

Collegeeducated Youth

7 3

6

40

21

7

21

28

Collegeeducated Youth

1998 Nonliterate Youth

Source: National Election Studies. Notes: 1. Vote-share weighted datasets. 2. All figures are in percent.

19

10

Left

30

Parties

Congress

BJP

Nonliterate Youth

1996

6

7

18

35

3

6

36

23

Collegeeducated Youth

1999 Nonliterate Youth

Table 3.6: BJP’s Vote Share Has Declined Sharply amongst Educated Youth

9

6

21

29

Nonliterate Youth

3

6

30

25

Collegeeducated Youth

2004

8

7

18

29

Nonliterate Youth

5

6

24

25

Collegeeducated Youth

2009

The Voting Pattern

57

Table 3.7: BJP Has Lost Its Vote Bank More amongst College-educated Youth Compared to College-educated Others Election 1996

BJP College-educated youth

38

College-educated others

31

Advantage of BJP amongst college-educated youth over college-educated others 1998

College-educated youth

39

College-educated others

34

Advantage of BJP amongst college-educated youth over college-educated others 1999

2009

5

College-educated youth

36

College-educated others

36

Advantage of BJP amongst college-educated youth over college-educated others 2004

7

0

College-educated youth

30

College-educated others

31

Advantage of BJP amongst college-educated youth over college-educated others

−1

College-educated youth

24

College-educated others

25

Advantage of BJP amongst college-educated youth over college-educated others

−1

Source: National Election Studies. Notes: 1. Vote-share weighted datasets. 2. All figures are in percent.

Like all upper-caste voters, the upper-caste youth have also voted for the BJP in large numbers in the past five Lok Sabha elections. Irrespective of electoral gains and losses of the BJP, more upper-caste youth voted for the BJP compared to the Congress. This is quite similar to the voting pattern amongst all upper-caste voters, irrespective of their age. What is important to note is that compared to the upper-caste voters aged above 33 years, the upper-caste youth voted for the BJP in greater proportion. The BJP’s popularity amongst the upper-caste voters helped them garner a lead over the Congress, amongst both the upper-caste

58 Sanjay Kumar

youth and upper-caste voters aged above 33 (others). But the lead of the BJP over the Congress is much bigger amongst the uppercaste youth compared to the upper-caste others. In the two Lok Sabha elections (1998 and 1999) which witnessed a sharp increase in the vote share of the BJP, the upper-caste youth voted for the BJP in big numbers. These two elections also witnessed greater shifts amongst the upper-caste voters aged above 33 years toward the BJP, compared to the Lok Sabha election held in 1996. But the popularity of the BJP amongst the upper-caste young voters seemed to be shortlived, since the 2004 Lok Sabha election witnessed declining support for the BJP amongst the upper-caste, young voters. The support for the BJP amongst the upper-caste, young voters declined further in the 2009 Lok Sabha election. Although the BJP still has an advantage over the Congress amongst both the upper-caste, young voters and the upper-caste voters who are older than 33 years, during last decade the party has lost its popularity among both these sections. This is a case for concern for the BJP since they seemed to have lost the support from its significant numbers of its voters who were instrumental in the rising popularity and electoral success of the BJP during the mid-1990s (Table 3.8). The regional parties seem to be the most popular voting choice amongst youth belonging to the Other Backward Classes (OBCs). Both the Congress and the BJP seem to have polled less than a quarter each amongst the young OBC voters. It is only in the 1998 and 1999 Lok Sabha elections that the BJP got a little more than one quarter of the votes amongst the young, OBC voters. The post-Mandal period has witnessed a large proportion of OBC Table 3.8: Upper-caste Youth Voted for BJP but the Party Has Been Losing Popularity Advantage BJP over Congress amongst

1996

1998

1999

2004

2009

Upper-caste Youth

11

29

25

11

5

Upper-caste Other

8

22

16

12

2

Source: National Election Studies. Notes: 1. Vote-share weighted datasets. 2. All figures are in percent.

The Voting Pattern

59

voters voting for regional parties such as the Rashtriya Janata Dal and the Janata Dal (United) in Bihar, the Samajwadi Party and the Rashtriya Lok Dal in Uttar Pradesh, the Janata Dal (Secular) in Karnataka, and the Indian National Lok Dal in Haryana (Table 3.9). Elections during the 1990s and after that have also witnessed a shift in the Dalit support base of the Congress. In the past five Lok Sabha elections held in India since 1996, only a little more than one quarter of the Dalit youth voted for the Congress. While the 1990s did not witness a decline in the support base of the Congress amongst Dalit youth, neither did it witness any increase in the popularity of the Congress amongst them. The BJP has never been a popular choice amongst the Dalit youth, which is evident from the fact that only a few of them voted for the BJP. Similar to the loss of support from the youth in general, the BJP has also lost the support of the Dalit youth in particular. In the 1996 Lok Sabha election, 17 percent Dalit youth voted for the BJP, which went down to 15 percent in the 1998 and 1999 Lok Sabha elections. In 2004, the figure stood at 14 percent and in the 2009 Lok Sabha election it further declined to 13 percent. As far as the BSP is concerned, barring 1996, the party has been second only to Congress in garnering the young Dalit vote. In the 1996 Lok Sabha election, less than 10 percent of the Dalit youth voted for the BSP, but subsequent Lok Sabha elections witnessed increasing support for the BSP amongst Dalit youth, with minor ups and downs. At the national level, a little more than one-fifth of the Dalit youth have voted for the BSP. Although there is hardly any difference in the level of support for the BSP amongst Dalit youth and Dalits aged above 33 years, it is important to note the Table 3.9: The Divided OBC Young Voters OBC Youth Voted for

1996

1998

1999

2004

2009

Congress

22

24

22

23

22

BJP

22

26

27

24

23

Source: National Election Studies. Notes: 1. Vote-share weighted datasets. 2. All figures are in percent.

60 Sanjay Kumar

increased support base of the BSP amongst Dalit youth. Like the BSP, the popularity of the Left parties is also to a large extent dependent on its support from the Dalit youth. During the last decade, nearly 10 percent of the Dalit youth have consistently voted for the Left parties (Table 3.10). A sizeable proportion of the Adivasi voters seems to shift their political preference as they grow older. In general, the Congress is more popular compared to the BJP amongst both the young Adivasi voters and Adivasi voters aged above 33 years. But it is important to note that within its own vote share, the BJP polled more votes amongst the young Adivasi voters compared to its vote amongst those Adivasi voters above 33 years. On the contrary, within the Congress’s own vote share, it gets more votes amongst the Adivasi voters who are over 33 years than it gets amongst the young Adivasi voters. During the past decade, the BJP had an advantage amongst the young Adivasi voters compared to older Adivasi voters. However, in recent elections the BJP seems to have lost that advantage. The gap between the vote for the BJP amongst young Adivasi and older Adivasi voters was 9 percent, which came down to 2 percent in 2004 and then increased slightly to 5 percent in the 2009 Lok Sabha election. On the other hand, the Congress always had a disadvantage amongst the Adivasi young voters compared to the older Adivasi voters (others)—the young Adivasi voters have always voted in lesser proportion for the Congress, a pattern which is consistent over the past several elections (Tables 3.11 and 3.12). Table 3.10: A Remarkable Shift amongst Young Dalit Voters toward BSP Parties

1996

1998

1999

2004

2009

Congress

32

27

28

28

28

BJP

17

15

15

14

13

BSP

8

25

18

22

21

Left

10

5

11

10

11

Source: National Election Studies. Notes: 1. Vote-share weighted datasets. 2. All figures are in percent.

The Voting Pattern

61

Table 3.11: The Adivasi Vote for the BJP: Young and Others Age Category

1996

1998

1999

2004

2009

Youth

26

24

26

30

27

Others

17

19

20

28

22

9

5

6

2

5

2004

2009

Difference

Source: National Election Studies. Notes: 1. Vote-share weighted datasets. 2. All figures are in percent. Table 3.12: The Adivasi Vote for the Congress: Young and Others Age Category

1996

1998

1999

Youth

38

34

44

37

35

Others

46

32

46

37

40

Difference

−8

2

−2

0

−5

Source: National Election Studies. Notes: 1. Vote-share weighted datasets. 2. All figures are in percent.

The youth vote is significant and extremely important for any political party since young voters are present in sizeable number. The 2009 Lok Sabha election saw heightened interest amongst political parties to win youth votes. Almost all the parties in India are now coming up with new strategies and using new technologies to win their support. At a time when India is considered one of the youngest countries of the world and a significant section of the population is below 35 years of age, it may be difficult for any political party to ignore such an important voting category. But the question is whether the youth vote for any particular political party in large numbers. The answer is “No.” Their vote is scattered across several political parties. The data collected during National Election Studies since 1996 show that there is hardly any significant advantage for any political party amongst young voters. The youth vote for all the major political parties has been within a two-percentage point band around their respective vote shares. One of the reasons why the youth do not vote as a separate

62 Sanjay Kumar

voting bloc based on their age is that they are themselves divided on socioeconomic lines and each socioeconomic sub category of youths has different voting preferences. For instance, compared to young men, more young women vote for Congress. In the case of the BJP it is the other way round, that is, young men vote for the party in a higher proportion than young women. The Congress has enjoyed an advantage over the BJP amongst young women voters, but not amongst young men voters, where the BJP leads. The BJP continues to do well among urban youth compared to rural youth but at the same time there has also been a sharp decline in the party’s vote share among urban youth over the years. There is a similar story in terms of education. The party does better among the educated youth than the nonliterate youth; however, even among the educated youth it has lost support over the last decade. Hence, it can be concluded that the support that the BJP had amongst urban and educated young voters has gone down during the last few Lok Sabha elections. The puzzle which the party should now try to grapple with is the loss of this sectional youth vote over the last two elections.

4 Young Candidates and Young Voters Jyoti Mishra

E

ver since the Lok Sabha election of 2009 there has been an increased, and some would argue a disproportionate, interest in what has been described as the “youth factor” in politics. This has happened largely due to the fact that soon after the 2009 election verdict, a large section of the news media, both print and electronic, had done news stories highlighting the election of several young candidates to the Lok Sabha. This so-called arrival of the youth leader (the yuva neta) was largely explained by journalists and political analysts in terms of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s growing appeal as well as the fact that more than 65 percent of India’s population was below the age of 35. The assumption was that this large proportion of young voters had naturally voted for candidates belonging to their generation. However, such an explanation is rather simplistic and erroneous. While it is true that as many as 79 candidates below the age of 40 years got elected to the lower house of India’s Parliament in 2009, what is also true is that the average age of the 15th Lok Sabha is 53 years, which makes it the third oldest house so far. In addition to this, data from the National Election Studies conducted by the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) reveals that in every Lok Sabha election since 1996, the youth vote for the

64 Jyoti Mishra

major political parties has been within a two-percentage point band around their respective vote shares. With this contradiction between perception and select facts, we thought it would be better to probe the issue further through the CSDS study. Is a candidate’s young age a valued attribute among the electorate? Do younger voters prefer younger candidates? Do older voters resist younger political leaders? Among all attributes of the candidates, does young age have the potential for becoming a winning attribute for any political leader? Does young age of a political leader come to symbolize more than just young age, rather promising enthusiasm, higher education, and modernity? And finally, is it age or the political lineage of candidates that determines their electoral success? These are some of the questions that this chapter deals with. We have tried to juxtapose the categories of youth voters vis-à-vis non-youth voters in greater frequency here, so as to inquire the distinctiveness of the opinion of the youth.

Leadership Preference Respondents of the study were asked to rank candidate’s experience, party, work, and young age respectively in the order of importance they give to each while voting. Table 4.1 denotes the percent of respondents who ranked these attributes at the number one position. Among the youth, age as an attribute receives the lowest support when compared to other attributes such as experience, party affiliation, and work. The majority of the people consider the candidate’s work and party affiliation as the most important quality. Experience receives marginally higher ranking from youth respondents than age itself. A little over 50 percent of the youth ranked age as the least important. About two-thirds of the voters above the age of 34 ranked age as the least important attribute as compared to experience, party affiliation, and the work done by the candidate. While there is a similarity among the responses of youth and non-youth (both attribute high importance to the work of the candidate and least

Young Candidates and Young Voters

65

Table 4.1: Candidate’s Work the Most Important Consideration for Youth Attribute of the Candidate Experience

13

Party affiliation

33

Work

40

Young

12

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

to age), comparatively less number of youth feel that age of the candidate is least important as compared to non-youth. However, when we asked whom would they would vote for if a senior 50-year-old candidate and a young 28-year-old candidate were contesting for the first time, the young candidate was the overwhelming choice of the majority of the youth (Table 4.2). Only about a quarter of the youth admit their preference for the older political leader. Conversely, nearly two-thirds of the youth prefer a young leader. The opinions of the non-youth or others are not so evidently divided. Hence, while the older respondents in lesser strength as compared to the young respondents support a young candidate, the higher preference for a younger leader over a senior one, in the given scenario, continues to exist even among the older respondents. Two trends are observed in Tables 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4. First, the support for a young leader exceeds the support for a senior leader among both young people as well as older people across the three questions. Second, youth as compared to non-youth, Table 4.2: Youth and Old Prefer Young Leader Young Leader

Senior Leader

Youth

62

25

Others

44

37

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

66 Jyoti Mishra Table 4.3: Young Leaders Better for Development Agree

Disagree

Youth

63

15

Others

53

18

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.” Table 4.4: Young Leaders Can Govern Better than Other Leaders Agree

Disagree

Youth

60

18

Others

45

27

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

in much greater numbers support either young leaders or agree that in various scenarios they have an edge over the older leaders. To reconfirm the trend observed, to check for its consistency, and to understand the overall picture, an index was created using four questions.1 Responses to the importance given to a candidate’s young age while voting, preference between a young and an old leader (other things remaining constant), agreement to the idea that for better development young leaders should be given the charge, and the idea that young leaders can govern better than others were collated and graded into four categories: oppose young leaders, low support for young leaders, moderate support for young leaders, and high support for young leaders. A little less than two-thirds of the youth moderately and highly support young leaders. Exactly the opposite is the case with older people. Fifty-eight percent of respondents from older age groups either oppose young leaders or fall in the category of low support. Youth are more likely to highly support a young leader, whereas older people are more likely to oppose the idea of a young leader (Table 4.5).

Young Candidates and Young Voters

67

Table 4.5: Support for Young Leaders More among Youth Compared to Others High Support

Moderate Support

Low Support

Oppose

Youth

30

29

23

18

Others

18

23

27

31

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

Men, as compared to women, across localities support young leaders in greater strength. This is consistent across education categories as well, where with similar education, men exceed women in terms of their support for a younger candidate. Education on the whole has a positive impact on support for young leaders and this is true across gender, and across rural and urban areas. The support for young leaders is higher from urban areas as compared to rural. College-educated urban youth form one of the most supportive categories, offering the least resistance to young leaders. Media exposure, overall, has a positive impact but the effect of exposure to media is slightly nuanced. While those not exposed to the media at all are the least acceptant of the idea of young leadership in politics; the highest acceptance occurs at moderate exposure levels. Among people highly exposed to the media, the support for a young candidate drops drastically. About 40 percent of the youth who are moderately exposed to the media highly support young political leaders. Among those highly exposed to media, the support for a young candidate falls to 32 percent. Among women this trend is even more pronounced. Compared to women having moderate media exposure or low exposure, women highly exposed to media support young leadership in far less strength. The level of opposition to young leaders is almost equal among women who have absolutely no media exposure and among women who are highly exposed to media (Table 4.6). Members of youth or student wings far exceed in their support for young political leadership as compared to the overall support, as well as compared to the support for young leadership from members of political parties and members of unions.

68 Jyoti Mishra Table 4.6: Support for Young Leaders Most among Women Moderately Exposed to Media Women

High Support

Oppose

14

27

No exposure to media Low exposure to media

24

20

Moderate exposure to media

35

18

High exposure to media

19

26

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent. Table 4.7: Support for Young Leaders Most among Youth Who Are Members of Student or Youth Wings of Political Parties Support for Young Leader High Support

Moderate Support

Members of political parties

34

38

Members of student/youth wing

56

21

Members of unions

34

39

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

However, compared to overall support levels, being a member of any of these three organizations leads to substantially higher support for young leadership (Table 4.7). What is interesting to note is the juxtaposing of our initial discussion in this chapter regarding ranking of age, work experience, party affiliation, and candidate’s work, with the overall support for young leaders. Among the four attributes—work, experience, party affiliation, and age—the age of a candidate was the most unpopular of the attributes mentioned by people irrespective of their age group. In a larger sense, the idea of young leadership finds fair acceptance, more so among youth and to some extent among older people, but the young age of a candidate, exclusively as a reason for voting has definitely not emerged as a practice.

Young Candidates and Young Voters

69

Reasons for Preference So far we have seen that most of the youth interviewed during the study clearly preferred young leaders over older leaders. In this section we shall see the possible reasons for this preference for young leaders, which go beyond the young age of the leader itself to the idea of political leadership by the young, and the attributes of enthusiasm (leading to efficient governance) and higher education (leading to better development) related to it. In the study, we asked people if they thought that the young leaders had enthusiasm and fresh thinking, and, hence performed better, or they thought that the young leaders had the zeal but lacked experience, and hence could not perform well (Table 4.8). The trend regarding various questions on attributes of young leadership as observed earlier, where those acceptant of young leadership or attributes of young leader exceed those who oppose it, continues here as well. In addition to that, compared to older people, the youth in greater strength are acceptant of the proposition that young leaders perform better due to their enthusiasm and fresh thinking. Another reason for the preference for a young leader over an older leader is the higher education attainment of the candidate. Through our study, we tried to find out whether educated young leaders speak to the collective aspiration of attaining higher education prevalent in the country. The question was posed in a way where the education of young leaders was pitched against their distance from ground realities and their respective effects on the candidate’s ability to solve problems. As compared to the Table 4.8: Young Leaders Perform Better Due to Their Enthusiasm Agree

Disagree

Youth

62

21

Others

47

29

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest No opinion.

70 Jyoti Mishra

previous proposition regarding the enthusiasm of young leaders, this particular one overall incited less support in favor of young leaders. The consistency of a larger number of people agreeing to a positive statement about young leaders as compared to those who oppose it continues through this section. However among all propositions mentioned till now, this particular one finds the least acceptance (Table 4.9). In the study, people were asked to compare young and senior/ older leaders on various aspects of governance. These aspects of governance were regularity of the candidate in visiting their respective constituency, keeping in touch with the voters, keeping in touch with party workers, development of the constituency, and working honestly.2 The assessment of young leaders is consistently more positive than that of senior leaders. Among all the five aspects of governance, young leaders were found to be most efficient at visiting their constituencies, by both young and older respondents. Keeping in touch with party workers was the task which the young respondents felt that the young leaders did not perform so well, whereas the older respondents assessed the young leaders as worst in the arena of carrying out development activities in their constituency. The responses to all these five aspects were collated and it was found that positive assessment for young leaders was higher than for older political leaders. As one can see in Table 4.10, a little less than a quarter of older respondents have a positive assessment of old leaders whereas nearly one-third of them think that young leaders are better than the old in a majority of the five activities. Youth in much higher numbers assess the young leaders positively, but in Table 4.9: Young Leaders Are Better Educated and Hence Can Govern Better Better Educated. Hence Solve Problems Better

Unaware of Ground Realities. Hence Cannot Solve Problems

Youth

51

30

Others

40

35

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

Young Candidates and Young Voters

71

Table 4.10: Young Leaders Better Evaluated by Young Respondents Youth

Others

Young leader better than old leaders

44

32

Older leader better than young leaders

16

24

No difference

25

29

Mixed support

15

15

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

the positive assessment of old leaders, is in much lower numbers when compared to the older respondents. This is in tandem with the overall trend that has been observed as yet.

Dynasties in Politics The question of youth and politics in India is linked to dynastic politics. In recent years, much concern has been shown around the fact that a large number of members of Parliament (MPs) or members of legislative assembly (MLAs) in India are from a political background. Scholars and researchers are deliberating on these issues to trace the conditions that may perpetrate the trend of dynastic politics in any democracy. If we take a panoramic view of major democracies around the world, in terms of the genealogies of their leaders, we clearly see that dynastic politics is not the function of the residual, premodern elements inherent in most developing societies; rather, it is evident in many countries both developing and developed. Even the world’s most aggressive advocate of democracy—the United States—has had it, the most prominent example being the Kennedy family, with generations in politics enjoying a stature which was nothing less than that of a royal family. Dynastic politics is so prevalent in some countries that it has become a problem and people are demanding laws against it. In the context of India, Patrick French has done a remarkable study on this issue. French, in his book India: A Portrait, collected information on the background of all the

72 Jyoti Mishra

545 members of the (current) 15th Lok Sabha (French 2011). 3 From the information collected, French found that while nearly half of all the MPs were without any significant family background, among young MPs aged 40 or below, a huge two-thirds were with a political background. What’s more, every MP below the age of 30 was from a political family. Among the 38 youngest MPs in the Parliament, 33 had entered politics and won elections with the help of a family connection. In the largest ruling party of the country—the Congress—all MPs below the age of 35 were from a political family. As French very eloquently puts it, the Indian Lok Sabha will soon become a “Vansh Sabha” if things do not change. This section of the chapter analyzes opinions of the youth regarding the phenomenon of dynasties in the Indian political system. Respondents in this study were asked whether—just like other professions—it was acceptable if politicians’ children continued with their father’s or family occupation of politics. Fiftythree percent of the youth and 48 percent of the older people said that “politicians’ children becoming politicians is wrong” (Table 4.11). Hence, overall, more youth are against the concept of dynastic politics than people from older age groups. Acceptance for the proposition of dynastic politics is slightly more among the nonliterate as compared to the educated youth. While among both, nonliterates as well as college-educated youth, there is more opposition than acceptance, college-educated youth in greater strength oppose it than do the nonliterate youth. In addition to this, young men and urban youth, as compared to females and rural counterparts respectively, are in greater strength against the idea of dynastic politics. Table 4.11: Everyone Not Opposed to Dynasty Politics Oppose Dynasty Politics

Accept Dynasty Politics

Youth

53

25

Others

48

25

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

Young Candidates and Young Voters

73

The next finding presents a contradiction to the one just discussed. When respondents were asked who they would vote for—between a 50-year-old, senior candidate who is also the sitting MP and a 28-year-old, young candidate who is also a son of an ex-MP—most of the people across all social backgrounds said that they would choose the young candidate (in spite of his political lineage) over the older, non-dynastic candidate. Across youth and older respondents, the probability of the young candidate with lineage being chosen is higher than that of the older non-dynastic candidate. It seems that even though the voters are against the idea of dynastic politics, when it comes to voting, the age of the candidate is more important than lineage for the voters, especially for the youth. So even if choosing a young candidate means choosing a dynastic one, they would prefer it over electing an older candidate (Table 4.12). Compared to young women, young men are more likely to choose a young, dynastic leader, and a young, dynastic leader finds more support in urban areas. As the level of education increases, the support for a young, dynastic leader increases. This particularly is in contradiction to the earlier question where education helped to form an opinion against the idea of dynastic politics. What one observes here is a disjunction between the arena of ideation and action among the young respondents. This disjunction not only continues but deepens when we look at opinions of those against dynastic politics. Young people who say that a politician’s children becoming politicians is wrong are more likely to prefer a young, dynastic candidate over a senior, nondynastic one. This is not entirely the case with older respondents. However, even among the older people, a substantial percent of Table 4.12: Young Dynasty Candidate Preferred over Senior Non-dynasty MP Young Dynasty Candidate

Older MP

Youth

53

30

Others

39

39

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

74 Jyoti Mishra

those against dynastic politics are likely to choose a 28-year-old candidate as their leader over a 50-year-old, non-dynastic leader (Table 4.13). Expectedly, all those for whom a candidate’s young age mattered the most while voting and all those who supported the idea of young leaders taking over politics are much more likely to choose a younger, although dynastic, candidate. Youth who felt that a candidate’s young age was the most important factor— as compared to the candidate’s work, his experience, and party affiliation—in large numbers chose the young, dynastic candidate. About 72 percent of the youth for whom the young age of a candidate mattered a lot chose the young, dynastic candidate. Conversely 46 percent of the youth for whom the young age of a candidate was not at all important chose the young, dynastic candidate. Comparing all those who oppose young political leaders vis-à-vis all those who highly support young leaders, the support for the young, dynastic candidate increases multiple times between those who oppose and those who support young leaders respectively among young respondents (Table 4.14). Hence one can say that when age and dynasty are pitched against each other, the young age of the candidate overshadows the eminent political lineage. Also, between young leadership and dynastic politics, one finds more people in favor of young political leaders, in spite of the fact that they may belong to political dynasties as against older non-dynastic leaders. Table 4.13: Young Dynasty Candidate Finds Support Even among Those Opposed to Dynasty Politics Prefer Older MP

Prefer Young Dynasty Candidate

Youth who oppose dynasty politics

29

61

Youth who accept dynasty politics

38

54

Others who oppose dynasty politics

46

43

Others who accept dynasty politics

43

47

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

Young Candidates and Young Voters

75

Table 4.14: Young Age of Candidate Given Preference over Political Lineage by Youth Support Older, Sitting MP as Candidate

Support Young Dynasty Candidate

Oppose young leaders

55

12

Support young leaders

13

80

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.” 3. Support refers to all those who formed the category of High Support in the Index of Support for Young Leaders (see Note 1).

Conclusion To conclude, across age categories, overall, young leaders find high support. Support for young leaders is greater among the urban, the educated, and the youth. Young and older people do not differ greatly regarding their choices on political leadership. Youth, only in greater strength, as compared to the old, support young leadership. Support for young leaders on various issues does not necessarily translate into voting based solely on the basis of the candidate’s young age. Opinions of young and older people regarding dynastic politics are alike. When dynastic politics is pitched against the young age of a political candidate, young age is preferred.

Notes and References Notes 1.

Index of Support for Young Leaders: The aim of this index was to understand the overall support and opposition to the idea of young political leaders. This index was created using Q12d, Q25b, Q27, and Q35 from the CSDS Youth and Politics Survey. Question 12d inquired whether a candidate’s young age was an important factor while voting, Q25b assessed agreement on the proposition that for better development

76 Jyoti Mishra

2.

young leaders should be given the charge of governing the country, Q27 was whom between a young and an old candidate would they choose in a Lok Sabha election, and Q35 asked whether young leaders govern country better than other leaders. These questions were collated and finally the responses were ordered in four categories: Oppose, Low Support, Moderate Support, and High Support. The index was accomplished in a two-step procedure. Q12d and A25b were first merged together and ordered into five categories: Oppose, Low, Moderate, High, and No Opinion. Respondents who formed the category of Oppose were all those who had ranked a candidate’s young age as the last or the penultimate among the four attributes provided, and disagreed to Q25b “For better development, young leaders should be given the charge of governing the country.” Conversely all those who fully agreed with this statement and ranked a candidate’s young age as the most important attribute or the second-most important attribute, formed the category of High Support. High Support also contained all those who had somewhat agreed to Q25b but for whom candidate’s young age mattered the most. All those who somewhat disagreed with the statement and ranked a candidate’s young age as the second- or third-most important attribute, along with those who somewhat agreed with the statement but ranked a candidate’s young age as least important formed the category of Low supporters. No Opinion remained a separate category and all others formed the category of Moderate supporters.  In the second step this initial index was added to Q27 and Q35, the responses were collated, and finally ordered into four categories: Oppose, Low Support, Moderate Support, and High Support. All those who had no opinion in all the four questions used in creating this index were set as missing from analysis. All those who answered in favor of young leaders in Q27 and Q35, and were either high or moderate supporters of young leaders as per Step 1 of this index, formed the group of High Supporters. All those who did not favor young leaders in both Q27 and Q35, and were low supporters of young leaders in Step 1 of the Index or opposed young leaders, formed the category of Oppose. All those who did not support young leaders in either of the two questions—Q27 and Q35—and opposed or had low support for young leaders in Step 1 were categorized as Low supporters. The rest formed the group of Moderate supporters. Index about Comparative Assessment of Work Done by Young and Old Political Leaders: This index was created based on five questions asking the respondents to compare old vis-à-vis young leaders’ regularity in visiting their constituency, keeping in touch with the voters, keeping in touch with party workers, development of the constituency, and about working honestly. The questions used to create this index were

Young Candidates and Young Voters

3.

77

Q26a, Q26b, Q26c, Q26d, and Q26e. The answer choices provided to the respondents for each of these questions were young leader, old leader, No difference, and No opinion/Can’t say. The responses to all these five questions were collated and divided into four categories: those having a positive opinion about young leaders, those having positive assessment of senior leaders, those who majorly feel that there is no difference, and those with no clear verdict (clubbed as mixed response). Those who had absolutely no opinion in any of the five instances were not considered for the analysis. Those who had positive opinion about young leaders were respondents who in three out of five instances felt that compared to the old leaders, the young leaders performed better. Those who had a positive assessment of senior leaders were respondents who in three out of the five instances posed felt that in comparison to the young leaders, the senior leaders were better at doing those tasks. Those who felt that there was no difference were respondents who in three out of five instances felt that the young and the old fared the same. Those who had a mixed response were respondents whose responses were disparate or did not provide any major preference for any of the three options of young leaders, senior leaders, and young and old identical. The full dataset for family politics in the Lok Sabha can be retrieved from the Web site for French (2011)—http://www.theindiasite.com/973-2/.

Reference French, Patrick. 2011. India: A Portrait—An Intimate Biography of 1.2 Billion People. New Delhi: Allen Lane.

5 Issues of Electoral Reforms Shreyas Sardesai

E

lectoral reforms have engaged the attention of India’s Parliament, government, judiciary, election commission, media, and civil society for a long time now, but they have largely remained on paper and are still to see the light of day. In the last two decades, there have been at least seven major governmentcommissioned reports for electoral reforms (Association for Democratic Reforms and National Election Watch 2011). Yet there has been no major headway in implementing these recommendations made by the various commissions. In recent years, the debate on reforming the electoral system has been reopened yet again, with anticorruption activists strongly demanding the introduction of the right to recall elected representatives and the right to reject candidates during voting. The two reform measures suggested by them are among the many radical reform ideas that are seen as having caught the imagination of the young voters, other reforms being making voting compulsory, and debarring those above 65 years from contesting elections. This chapter will look at each of these reform measures in some detail, what they mean, and most importantly, what are the perceptions of the youth and the others about them across key demographics,

Issues of Electoral Reforms 79

according to the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) study.

Idea of the Right to Recall One of the most basic and important questions in modern democratic systems has been about how to make elected representatives more accountable to the voters who have chosen them. While holding of regular elections allows people to elect their representatives, there is no provision in the Indian Constitution by which people can un-elect them if they are dissatisfied with their work or behavior. Under the present system, voters in India voting in national and regional elections can assert their voting right once every five years or whenever elections are held. A member of Parliament (MP) or a member of the legislative assembly (MLA) has a fixed term of office for five years and can only be disqualified under the antidefection provisions or if s/he holds any office of profit, and is of unsound mind and so declared by a competent court (Articles 102 and 191) (Sorabjee 2011). However, there is no provision in the Constitution or the Representation of People Act, 1951, whereby the people who have elected an MP or MLA can remove her/him before the end of the fixed term. The right to recall is a democratic procedure that seeks to correct this perceived problem. It is a procedure which provides voters the right to remove their elected representatives before the expiry of their term, if they are found to be incompetent and do not live up to expectations. The demand for the right to recall has been put forth not just by social and political activists, but even parliamentarians themselves (Law Ministry 2011). In September 2007, the then Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee had made a strong case for giving voters the right to recall their MPs “if they are found to be incompetent, insensitive, corrupt or indifferent to the duties, or indulge in activities unbecoming that of a Member of Parliament both inside and outside.” According to Chatterjee, “The power of ‘recall’ is based on the maxim that elected members of representative bodies should

80 Shreyas Sardesai

be accountable and answerable to their constituents throughout their term of office” (Chatterjee 2007). Recall is a direct democratic procedure used in some countries around the world. The practice originated in Switzerland at the end of the 19th century and now exists in 6 of the 26 Swiss cantons (although not at the federal level). It became operative in the United States in 1903 in the Los Angeles municipality (Gay and Coleman 2011; International IDEA 2008; The Indian Express 2008). At present, 19 US states allow for recall of state-level officials and at least 29 states (some sources say 36) authorize recall of local-level officials. Only twice in US history have governors been removed using this device: Lynn J. Frazier (North Dakota) in 1921 and Gray Davis (California) in 2003 (Gray 2003). The Canadian province of British Columbia enacted representative recall in 1995. Venezuela and Argentina also have provisions for recall. While in Venezuela the elected head of state is subjected to it, in Argentina it is limited to local elected officials. There is no recall procedure in the United Kingdom (UK), although the Conservative–Liberal Democrat coalition which assumed office in 2010 has stated that it will legislate to introduce the provision. In India, provisions for recalling elected representatives exist at the level of local bodies in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan, and Bihar (Bhanu 2008, 2011). In Madhya Pradesh, amendments made in the year 2000 to Section 24 of the MP Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, and Section 47 of the MP Municipalities Act, 1961, paved the way for recall of mayors and chairmen of municipalities respectively (Ghatwai 2011). In Chhattisgarh, Section 47 of the Chhattisgarh Nagar Palika Act, 1961, provides for holding of elections to recall elected presidents for nonperformance. The process gets initiated only after the municipal body has completed two years of existence and when three-fourths of the total number of the councillors in a particular body write to the district collector demanding a recall. After verifying the petition, the collector can report to the state government. After considering the report, the state government can recommend to the state election commission to conduct a poll to recall presidents. In Rajasthan, an amendment to the Rajasthan Municipalities Act in March 2011 introduced the

Issues of Electoral Reforms 81

concept of recall of a directly elected mayor or chairperson of a municipal body (The Hindu 2011a). In Bihar, the recall process is set to change with a proposed amendment to the Bihar Municipal Act and will now begin with the voters of urban civic bodies—nagar parishad and nagar panchayat—who can remove the elected representatives from office, if two-thirds of the voters submit a signed petition to the urban development department (Jha 2011; Madhavan 2011). In the Bihar model, therefore, the power to recall is directly with the voters. In Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh, the recall process is initiated by the councillors and, therefore, can be politically motivated. In Chhattisgarh, recall elections in June 2008 in the nagar panchayats of Gunderdehi, Nawagarh, and Rajpur saw the successful recall of three presidents of local urban bodies (John 2008). In Madhya Pradesh, there has been as many as 27 recall motions between 2000 and 2011. Of these, 13 saw the return of previously elected chairpersons, while 14 were voted out. Madhya Pradesh was also the first state to give the gram sabhas the right to recall the panchayat chairperson in the event of wrongdoing (Packel 2008). Similarly in Punjab, panchs (elected members) can remove a sarpanch by moving a no-confidence motion. In May 2011, the Supreme Court disapproved an attempt by the Punjab government to abolish this provision (Mahapatra 2011). The CSDS study shows that over two-thirds of the young respondents (69 percent) interviewed in constituencies which either elected a young candidate in 2009 or where a young candidate came second, agreed with the statement that “people should be given the right to recall their MP/MLA if they are not satisfied with their performance.” Sixteen percent were of the opinion that elected representatives should be allowed to work for the full five year term even if people are unhappy with them. The support for the right to recall increased between 2009 and 2011, as a similar question asked in the National Election Study conducted by CSDS during the 2009 Lok Sabha elections had seen 62 percent of the youth answering in the affirmative. However, it must be added that the proportion of those against the idea has also gone up since 2009. While the support for right to recall among the older respondents has gone up as well, it is still less compared

82 Shreyas Sardesai

to the youth. Among the youth, for every person against the idea of recall there are four who are in favor. Among the older people this ratio drops to three people in support for every person who opposes (Table 5.1). An analysis in terms of locality reveals that the sentiment in favor of calling back MPs and MLAs is stronger in urban areas (cities and towns) compared to rural areas (villages). In both urban and rural areas, compared to others (34+ years), the youth (18–25 years and 26–33 years) show much higher support for the idea of right to recall. In urban areas, the strongest support for recall is seen among youth aged between 26 and 33 years. Within rural areas, youth in the 18–25 years age group show the highest support. While the gap in terms of percentage of people who support recall among rural and urban 18–25-year-olds is fairly small at 5 percent, it widens to 14 percent among the 26–33 years age category (Table 5.2). The support for recalling an elected representative before the completion of her/his term is much less among older respondents who are satisfied with their MP’s and MLA’s work, compared to older respondents who said they were dissatisfied with their work. This distinction is, however, not seen among the youth who strongly support the right to recall even when they are satisfied with the performance of their elected representatives. This might indicate that unlike the older respondents, the youth are supportive of the recall idea irrespective of their assessment of Table 5.1: High Support for Right to Recall, Particularly among Youth Idea of Right of Recall Youth 2009

Support

Oppose

62

14

Youth 2011

69

16

Others 2009

54

13

Others 2011

57

18

Sources: National Election Study (2009); Youth and Politics Survey (2011).1 Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

Issues of Electoral Reforms 83

Table 5.2: Urban Youth More Strongly in Favor of Recall; Rural Youth Not Far Behind Idea of Right of Recall Support

Oppose

Rural 18–25 years

69

13

Rural 26–33 years

63

18

Rural 34+ years

56

17

Urban 18–25 years

74

19

Urban 26–33 years

77

16

Urban 34+ years

60

20

Locality and Age

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

the work done by their MP and MLA. However, it must be added that when it comes to opposing the idea of recall, youth and rest show similar behavior—that is to say, youth who are content with the performance of their MPs and MLAs, show higher opposition to recall than those who are dissatisfied (Tables 5.3 and 5.4). Compared to young nonliterates, the educated youth are more supportive of the right to recall. However, among the educated youth, support for recall is strongest among those who are low to moderately educated (primary school pass and high school pass), than those who are college educated. Among young Table 5.3: Youth Strongly Support Recall Even When Satisfied with MP’s Work Idea of Right of Recall Support

Oppose

Youth satisfied with work of their MP

71

18

Youth dissatisfied with work of their MP

71

11

Others satisfied with work of their MP

58

21

Others dissatisfied with work of their MP

66

16

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

84 Shreyas Sardesai Table 5.4: When Satisfied with MLA’s Work, Opposition to Recall Is Higher Idea of Right of Recall Support

Oppose

Youth satisfied with work of their MLA

69

19

Youth dissatisfied with work of their MLA

70

13

Others satisfied with work of their MLA

56

24

Others dissatisfied with work of their MLA

69

13

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.” Table 5.5: Youth Who Are Low to Moderately Educated Are More Supportive of Recall than the Highly Educated Idea of Right of Recall Support

Oppose

Nonliterate youth

55

18

Primary-school-pass youth

72

14

High-school-pass youth

72

16

College-educated youth

68

17

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest No opinion.

nonliterates, a majority supports the right to recall by a wide margin (Table 5.5). Table 5.6 shows that endorsement for the recall device is higher among youth with high, moderate, and low exposure to the media (that is, those who are regular readers of newspapers, regular listeners and watchers of news on radio and TV respectively, and those who use the internet regularly) than among youth with no exposure to the media at all. The level of support for the idea of recall rises gradually as exposure to media increases. However, when it comes to opposing the idea of recall, it is not a linear transition.

Issues of Electoral Reforms 85

Table 5.6: Youth with Media Exposure Are More Supportive of Recall than Youth with No Media Exposure Idea of Right of Recall Support

Oppose

Youth with high media exposure

74

18

Youth with moderate media exposure

74

14

Youth with low media exposure

72

14

Youth with no media exposure

53

19

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

While the right to recall can be a democratic tool to ensure more accountability, and the threat of recall could make elected representatives meet minimum standards of behavior and performance, concerns have been raised that it may discourage elected people from taking necessary decisions for the fear that they may become unpopular. In an article in the Indian Express in September 2011, political scientist Suhas Palshikar wrote that the right to recall will lead to a “pandering to popular prejudices and passions, and resorting to a clientelist distribution of patronage” (Palshikar 2011). Then there are former chief election commissioners who feel that right to recall is “impractical” and “infeasible” as it would be difficult to verify hundreds of thousands of voter signatures (The Economic Times 2011a; The Hindu 2011b). Soli Sorabjee, former attorney general of India, has also raised several important questions with respect to right to recall. In an article published in the Hindustan Times in September 2011, he wrote Who should be vested with the power of recall? If power of recall is to be vested in the voters of the member’s constituency, what should be the number of registered voters who are signatories to the recall petition? The voters who did not vote for the elected candidates would naturally demand his recall. Therefore, it is necessary to ensure that sufficient number of voters sign the recall petition. What is that sufficient number? (Sorabjee 2011)

86 Shreyas Sardesai

He went on to add that “recall is fraught with serious consequences to the member who is sought to be recalled. Who will decide whether the alleged grounds in the recall petition are justified or not: civil courts or an Election Commission or any other authority?” (Sorabjee 2011). Clearly, the proposition remains wrought in larger political questions which will need to be factored in, if and when the issue is legislated upon. One could propose that this particular reform enjoys popular support among the respondents of this study. The opposition to this reform is limited to less than one-fifth of the total respondents across all categories.

Idea of Compulsory Voting In India, voter turnout in national elections has mostly hovered between 55 and 59 percent, crossing 60 percent in five elections (1967, 1977, 1984, 1989, and 1998), many of which are considered as landmark elections. In the Lok Sabha elections of 2009 and 2004, 58 percent of all registered voters turned out to vote (Table 5.7). When compared to other democracies, both in India’s neighborhood and in the West, and even those that do not have compulsory voting, India ranks low (barring Pakistan) in terms of voter turnout in national elections (Table 5.8). Low voter turnouts could be attributed to various reasons. They could be due to logistical problems, or because people have migrated in search of work, or due to errors in electoral lists. Voting could also be low because the political system lacks legitimacy among citizens, or because the options are disagreeable for voters. To deal with this problem of poor voter turnouts, suggestions have been made in the recent past to make voting compulsory or mandatory in order to ensure maximum participation of people in the democratic process. Compulsory voting is a system in which voters are obliged to vote in an election and if they fail to do so they can be penalized. At present, the right to vote in India is not a fundamental right but merely a statutory right. It is

Issues of Electoral Reforms 87

Table 5.7: Voter Turnout in Lok Sabha Elections (1952–2009) Election Year

Turnout

1952

44.9

1957

45.4

1962

55.4

1967

61.0

1971

55.3

1977

60.5

1980

56.9

1984

64.1

1989

62.0

1991

55.9

1996

57.9

1998

62.0

1999

60.0

2004

58.1

2009

58.2

Source: Election Commission of India’s statistical reports of Lok Sabha elections. Note: All figures are in percent.

not mandatory but voluntary for those aged 18 years and above to exercise their franchise. Compulsory voting, on the other hand, reshapes one’s view of democracy. It means that voting is no longer a right but a duty. In his article in the American Political Science Review in 1987, political scientist R. W. Jackman identified three institutions that seem to enhance turnout: compulsory voting, the electoral system (proportional representation, nationally competitive districts, etc.), and unicameralism (Jackman 1987). In an overview of the comparative literature on voter turnout by Jackman, G. B. Powell, and M. Franklin among others, André Blais summarizes that “compulsory voting increases turnout can be construed as a well-established proposition. This pattern has been confirmed by every study of turnout in western democracies, and the magnitude of the estimated impact is almost always around 10 to 15 points” (Blais 2006). However, he goes on to add that while

Brazil

2011

2010

2012

2011

2009

2008

United States

Spain

United Kingdom

Russia

Canada

India

Pakistan

Parliamentary

Parliamentary

Parliamentary

Presidential

Parliamentary

Parliamentary

Presidential

Parliamentary

Parliamentary

Presidential

Presidential

Presidential

Presidential

Parliamentary

Parliamentary

Election Type

45

58

61

65

66

69

70

71

75

75

79

79

80

85

93

Voter Turnout

39

56

54

63

61

63

57

65

69

71

77

77

71

79

81

VAP Turnout

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

Compulsory Voting?

Source: International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, http://www.idea.int/vt/country_view.cfm?id=72, accessed on January 21, 2011. Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Figures have been rounded off. 3. Voter Turnout is the total number of votes cast (valid or invalid) divided by the number of names on the voters’ register, expressed as a percentage. 4. VAP is the total number of votes cast (valid or invalid) divided by the Voting Age Population figure, expressed as a percentage.

2009

2008

Germany

2010

2010

Argentina

2011

2007

France

Thailand

2012

Bangladesh

Sri Lanka

2010

2008

Australia

Election Year

Country

Table 5.8: Voter Turnouts around the World

Issues of Electoral Reforms 89

we know that compulsory voting increases turnout and that its impact depends on its enforcement … we do not know how strict that enforcement must be in order to work. We know nothing about the public’s awareness and perceptions of the law and its implementation. And there are no comparative analyses of the determinants of turnout in countries with and without compulsory voting. (Blais 2006)

Those in favor of compulsory voting argue that it imposes a regular civic duty on the citizens and increases their interest in politics and governance. A democratically elected government’s decisions, it is argued, become more legitimate when greater proportions of the population participate in the voting process. In other words, the legitimacy of a government gets enhanced when there is a higher turnout. Those in favor of making voting mandatory also argue that it makes elections less expensive as political parties have to spend less money on mobilizing the electorate to vote. Lastly, they argue that if democracy is government by the people, then this must include all people, and it is every citizen’s responsibility to elect their representatives. The main argument against compulsory voting is that since it is forced, it is not consistent with the freedom associated with democracy. Critics say that it is not democratic to force people to cast their vote, and in a democracy a person should not only be free to participate in the electoral process whenever he or she wishes to but also be free to ignore it equally. Voting, they say, is not an intrinsic obligation and forcing it would be an infringement of the citizens’ freedom associated with democratic elections. They argue that people should be encouraged to vote instead of being penalized for not voting. The other criticism is that it is unfair to force the voter to vote even when s/he is not supportive of any of the candidates. By forcing the uninterested and the disenchanted to vote, the outcome of the vote could well be less informed and less rational. While making voting mandatory will result definitely in a higher turnout, it will not have an effect on political knowledge or interest. Then there is the economic argument against it which says that maintaining and enforcing compulsory voting laws may not be financially feasible for many developing countries (Lijphart 1997).

90 Shreyas Sardesai

There are still others who argue that if at all voting is to be made compulsory, then the voters should be provided with an option where they are able to express their disapproval of the choices on offer by rejecting all candidates. This argument thus links the compulsory voting with the right to reject. This chapter will later focus on the right to reject in greater detail. Compulsory voting is not a new concept. At least 31 countries have implemented it in some form or the other. Some of the first countries that introduced mandatory voting laws were Belgium in 1893, Argentina in 1914, and Australia in 1924. There are also examples of countries such as Venezuela and the Netherlands, which practiced compulsory voting at one time but have since abolished it. There are differences in how compulsory voting is enforced. In Australia, there is strong enforcement. Voters are obliged to go to the polling station but can come away without voting after ticking their names off. Nonattendees face fines of AUD 20–50 and possible imprisonment if they refuse to pay their fines. In Peru, voters have to carry a stamped voting card for several months after the election in order to obtain some services and goods. In Greece, it becomes difficult for citizens to get a new passport or driver’s license if they don’t vote. In Mexico or Italy, while there are no formal sanctions, there are social or arbitrary sanctions. In Italy nonvoting makes it difficult to get a daycare place for a child. In Singapore, nonvoters are removed from the electoral register until they reapply, giving a reason for their abstention (Elliot 2005). In India, compulsory voting has been introduced only in the state of Gujarat and that too at the local level. In December 2009, the Gujarat Assembly passed the Gujarat Local Authorities Laws (Amendment) Bill 2009 which made, for the first time in the country, voting mandatory in local body polls. It was, however, returned by the Governor in April 2010 for reconsideration by the Assembly on the ground that it violated Article 19(1)(A) of the Constitution which guarantees freedom of expression which also includes the right to not vote (Dasgupta 2010). The Bill was, however, readopted by the Gujarat Assembly and passed again in February 2011 in its original form (Outlook 2011). The Gujarat

Issues of Electoral Reforms 91

Bill is limited to elections to the local self-government bodies in the state, including the municipal corporations, municipalities, and the district, taluka, and village panchayats. It seeks to send notices to the “guilty” persons who do not turn up for voting, but the bill does not specify what would be the “punishment” for not voting. If voters do not like any of the candidates, they have the option of none of the above and thus reject all candidates. In a study conducted by the Research Foundation for Governance in India in 2010 in Gujarat, it was found that 76 percent of the 260 people interviewed agreed with the idea of compulsory voting. When asked why they supported it, 57 percent said that it will lead to “better governance” and 27 percent said it was their “civic duty” (Research Foundation for Governance in India 2010). The question then is, should voting during elections, local or national, be a forced affair? A large number of people seem to believe that it should. More than half the people interviewed, young and old, are of the view that “voting should be made compulsory for all eligible voters in order to strengthen democracy.” About a quarter are of the view that “in a democracy, people should be free to decide whether to vote or not.” While the youth are clearly more enthusiastic about making voting mandatory than the others, the opposition to the idea runs consistent across both age groups (Table 5.9). Table 5.10 shows that the support for compulsory voting is much stronger in urban areas compared to rural areas. Within urban areas, the support is highest among the 26–33 years age group, followed closely by the 18–25-year-olds. Even within Table 5.9: Majority in Favor of Compulsory Voting, Youth More So than Others Idea of Compulsory Voting Age Category

Support

Oppose

Youth

60

26

Others

52

26

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

92 Shreyas Sardesai Table 5.10: Very High Support for Compulsory Voting among Urban Youth Idea of Compulsory Voting Support

Oppose

Rural 18–25 years

59

25

Rural 26–33 years

52

28

Rural 34+ years

50

25

Urban 18–25 years

70

25

Urban 26–33 years

73

23

Urban 34+ years

57

27

Locality and Age

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

rural areas, where approval for compulsory voting is not as high as urban areas, the highest support for the idea is seen among the youth, particularly those aged between 18 and 25 years. Again, as we saw in the case of right to recall, even on this issue while the difference in terms of percentage of people who support this proposition among rural and urban 18–25-year-olds is 11 percent, it nearly doubles to 21 percent among the 26–33 years age category. In both urban and rural areas, those aged 34 years and above are least supportive of the idea of making voting mandatory. If we look at the opinion on mandatory voting in terms of education, we find that youth who are more educated tend to favor mandatory voting in much larger numbers than those with little or no education. In fact, the higher the level of education, the greater is the support for the idea of compulsory voting. However, it must be stressed that the opposition to the idea also increases as we go up the education ladder. A large proportion of nonliterate youth did not have an opinion on the issue (Table 5.11). A deeper analysis reveals that the support for compulsory voting crosses 70 percent among college-educated youth who belong to the upper class. If we look at the opinion on compulsory voting among those who voted in the 2009 Lok Sabha election and those who did not

Issues of Electoral Reforms 93

Table 5.11: Among Youth, Higher the Level of Education, More the Support for Compulsory Voting Idea of Compulsory Voting Support

Oppose

Nonliterate youth

45

19

Primary-school-pass youth

56

25

High-school-pass youth

62

24

College-educated youth

64

30

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

vote, we find that while 20 percent of the youth who did not vote hold the opinion that in a democracy people should be free to not vote, more than three times that (62 percent) support compulsion. This figure in affirmation of compulsory voting is surprisingly higher than the youth who had voted. If you observe those who did not vote, only the youth exceed their counterparts who voted. The trend does not continue for the older people, among whom there is a substantial 14 percent difference (Table 5.12). Table 5.13 shows that the support for mandatory voting is much higher among those who said that their vote has an effect Table 5.12: Compulsory Voting Finds Supporters Even in Youth Who Did Not Vote in the 2009 Lok Sabha Polls Idea of Compulsory Voting Support

Oppose

Youth who voted in 2009 Lok Sabha election

60

27

Youth who did not vote in 2009 Lok Sabha election

62

20

Others who voted in 2009 Lok Sabha election

54

26

Others who did not vote in 2009 Lok Sabha election

40

30

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

94 Shreyas Sardesai Table 5.13: Compulsory Voting Favored More by Those Who Believe Their Vote Matters Idea of Compulsory Voting Support

Oppose

Youth who believe their vote has an effect

71

23

Youth who believe their vote does not have an effect

60

26

Others who feel their vote has an effect

69

22

Others who feel their vote does not have an effect

50

28

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

on how the country is run, than those who think otherwise. Both youth and non-youth who believe in the efficacy of their vote, support compulsory voting strongly and in almost equal measure. However, the gap between the two age categories widens when we look at the flip side, that is, those who do not believe in the efficacy of their vote. While the support for compulsory voting is still quite high among youth who think that their vote does not have an effect, the same cannot be said about the others who hold the same view. Similarly, those who have a greater interest in politics are more in favor of mandatory voting than those who do not have an interest in politics. Among the latter category, we find that the youth are more enthusiastic about mandatory voting than the older people. Among the former category, that is, those who have an interest in politics, while the youth show stronger support for compulsory voting compared to the older respondents, they also are stronger opponents of such a move (Table 5.14).

Idea of the Right to Reject As mentioned in the previous section, some of the critics of compulsory voting are of the view that such a measure can be truly

Issues of Electoral Reforms 95

Table 5.14: Those Interested in Politics Favor the Idea of Compulsory Voting Idea of Compulsory Voting Support

Oppose

Youth who have interest in politics

66

31

Youth who do not have interest in politics

49

26

Others who have interest in politics

61

25

Others who do not have interest in politics

42

26

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

democratic only when voters are also provided with a “none of the above” or “right to reject” option on the ballot. There are very few instances (Chile and Brazil) across the world of compulsory voting systems that allow voters to select a “none of the above” option on the ballot paper (Electoral Commission 2006). In India, the demand that electors should have the right to reject candidates picked up momentum during the recent antcorruption movement of Anna Hazare. In September 2013, acting on a 2004 plea by the PUCL, the Supreme Court directed the Election Commission to give voters the right to reject all candidates in the fray through a negative vote. The idea is to give voters an option on the electronic voting machine which says “None of the above” (NOTA) if they are unhappy with all the available candidate choices in their constituency. In other words, the right to reject gives the voters a chance to cast their vote of disapproval if they do not support or are not enthused by any of the given choices provided to them. This measure is also known as negative voting or neutral voting. At present, if the voters do not think any of the candidates are worthy of their vote, they can indirectly exercise their right to reject all the candidates in the fray through the Rule 49 (o) provision of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 (Law Ministry, n.d.). According to Rule 49 (o), if an elector decides not to vote, then after his electoral roll number has been duly entered in the register of voters and he has put his signature or thumb impression, a remark stating her/his wish to

96 Shreyas Sardesai

not vote is to be made by the presiding officer, and the signature or thumb impression of the elector is to be obtained against such remark. This provision, however, does not ensure the secrecy of voting as the polling officials and the polling agents in the polling station get to know about the decision of the voter. This provision also has no bearing on the final poll outcome. The right to reject or negative voting concept, on the other hand, while maintaining the secrecy of the vote, can have a bearing on the final outcome. For example, if in a particular constituency the total number of negative votes exceeds 50 percent, a repoll could be ordered. It can give the voters a veto power in the real sense of the term and the power to decide the fate of the political parties’ choices, instead of the parties dictating voters’ choices. The Election Commission had twice recommended the right to reject proposal to the government, once in 2001 and then again in 2004 (Election Commission of India 2004). In 2004, after receiving “proposals from a very large number of individuals and organizations that there should be a provision enabling a voter to reject all the candidates in the constituency if he does not find them suitable,” the Election Commission under Chief Election Commissioner T. S. Krishnamurthy recommended to the government that the law should be amended to specifically provide for negative/ neutral voting. For this purpose, Rules 22 and 49B of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, may be suitably amended adding a proviso that in the ballot paper and the particulars on the ballot unit, in the column relating to names of candidates, after the entry relating to the last candidate, there shall be a column “None of the above” to enable a voter to reject all the candidates, if he chooses so. (Ibid.)

However, later Chief Election Commissioner S. Y. Quraishi expressed his apprehensions about (even if he did not reject) the proposal. Quraishi saw the demand to reject all candidates in elections as a “ticklish affair” that requires debate and discussion before being considered. In an interview to a television news channel in August 2011, Quraishi said “What will happen if majority of people reject all candidates? We will go for another poll? As it is, you have to balance it with the fact that people

Issues of Electoral Reforms 97

have election fatigue. How many elections shall we have?” (The Economic Times 2011b). Moreover, while many proponents of the right to reject attribute low voter turnouts to the disillusionment among the electorate with bad candidate choices and the lack of an option to express their dissent, there is evidence to indicate that this kind of reasoning may be too simplistic. The National Election Study conducted by the CSDS during the 2009 Lok Sabha election revealed that only about 2 percent of those who did not vote said it was because of the lack of good candidate choices. Having said that, there is a considerable section of the population, which is quite supportive of the concept of negative voting. Table 5.15 shows that a majority of the people, both youth and others, in the constituencies that were part of the study are of the view that voters should get the option of rejecting all candidates while voting, if they do not like any of them. The support for the idea among both the age groups has gone up marginally compared to 2009, when a similar question was asked during the National Election Study. Youth favor the right to reject more strongly than others. As seen in the cases of right to recall and compulsory voting, the idea of right to reject also finds more support in urban areas than in rural areas. The difference in terms of percentage of people who support this proposition among rural and urban areas is Table 5.15: High Support for Right to Reject, Particularly among Youth Idea of Right to Reject Age Category

Support

Oppose

59

17

Youth

2009 2011

60

14

Others

2009

50

15

2011

53

15

Sources: National Election Study (2009); Youth and Politics Survey (2011).2 Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest either said “No” or had “No opinion.”

98 Shreyas Sardesai

a good 11–14 percent across age groups. While the support for this idea is highest (nearly three-fourths) among urban respondents aged between 26 and 33 years, it is lowest (50 percent) among rural respondents aged 34 and above (Table 5.16). The findings indicate that the higher the educational attainment of the youth, the stronger is their support for the right to reject. A high proportion of nonliterate youth (39 percent) abstained from answering and opted for the third option. Among the educated youth, the strongest opinions for and against the idea were found among the college-educated youth (Table 5.17). Table 5.16: Urban Areas More in Favor of Right to Reject Idea of Right to Reject Support

Oppose

Rural 18–25 years

55

15

Rural 26–33 years

58

13

Rural 34+ years

50

15

Urban 18–25 years

66

17

Urban 26–33 years

72

15

Urban 34+ years

61

19

Locality and Age

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.” Table 5.17: Stronger Opinions among the Educated on Right to Reject Idea of Right to Reject Support

Oppose

Nonliterate youth

53

8

Primary-school-pass youth

57

14

High-school-pass youth

62

13

College-educated youth

63

17

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

Issues of Electoral Reforms 99

Table 5.18: “Reject” Favored More by Youth Who Voted on Candidate Lines Rather than Party Lines in 2009 Idea of Right to Reject Support

Oppose

Youth who voted for “party” in 2009

63

16

Youth who voted for “candidate” in 2009

68

16

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest either said “No” or had “No opinion.”

Those youth who said that they had voted mainly for the candidate and not her/his party during the 2009 Lok Sabha election, are slightly more supportive of the right to reject candidates, than those who said that they voted on the basis of party loyalties irrespective of the candidate. However, the difference between the two is not very wide (Table 5.18). At present, negative voting exists in some countries. The US state of Nevada has the option “None of these candidates,” Ukraine has “Against all,” France has “vote blanc,” and Spain and Colombia have “voto en blanco.” Bangladesh introduced the option in 2008 (The Sentinel 2011). Russia had “Against all,” which was abolished in 2006 (Swain 2010).

Idea of Debarring Those above 65 Years from Contesting Elections Over 60 percent of India’s population falls in the age bracket 15–59 years (working age group) according to Census 2011 (53.4 percent in 1961) (Subaiya and Bansod 2011). This is in sharp contrast to 8.5 percent of India’s population which is 60 years and above (5.6 percent in 1961) (Table 5.19). The difference between the two age brackets is expected to remain stark, as it has been, at least for the next two decades. Moreover, the youth segment, that is, the 15–39 years age group is also a significant 41.87 percent of the total population (39.80 percent in 1991).

100 Shreyas Sardesai Table 5.19: Proportion of Population in Different Age Groups in India Age Group

1961

2011

Less than 14 years

40.9

30.8

15–59 years

53.4

60.3

5.6

8.5

60 years and above Source: Census of India. Note: All figures are in percent.

Considering the relatively young age profile of India’s population, the profile of India’s elected representatives poses quite a contrast. How representative of the population are the Lok Sabha MPs in terms of age? Twenty-seven percent of the 543 MPs in the Lok Sabha following the 2009 election were 60 years and above. Seventy-three percent were between 25 and 59 years (34 percent fall in the 50–59 years age group, 27 percent were between 40 and 49 years, 11 percent of all MPs were aged between 30 and 39, and one percent was between 25 and 29) (Table 5.20). With a large proportion of Indians relatively young, but those representing them and leading the country still quite old, a much talked about solution that has been floated by some in recent times in order to rectify this huge imbalance between the young and the old, is one which seeks to put an upper age limit on candidates contesting elections. Such a reform, it is felt, will automatically ensure greater participation of the middle and Table 5.20: Proportion of Lok Sabha MPs in Different Age Groups Age Group

Number of MPs

Share of Lok Sabha (%)

25–29 years

6

1

30–39 years

57

11

40–49 years

146

27

50–59 years

185

34

60 years and above

149

27

Source: loksabha.nic.in (for date of birth of MP), accessed on September 29, 2013. Note: Based on the age of MPs when they were elected to the 15th Lok Sabha.

Issues of Electoral Reforms 101

younger generation in the electoral, legislative, and decisionmaking process of the country. Younger and more dynamic leaders, it is believed, will be able to connect better with the Indian youth and bring about more positive changes in tune with their aspirations. One way to achieve this could be by debarring those above a certain age from contesting elections, and thus ensuring that the aged and elderly politicians are nearly out of the race for electoral and high offices. The feeling among many is that the age at which most people retire from work in other professions in India (65 years), is the age at which politicians in India actually become eligible to be at the helm of governance. The average age of the Indian Cabinet is 65 years. This compares poorly with that of Britain at 51 years or even the United States at just above 57 years (Mukherjee 2010). Most ministers with top portfolios in India are 65 years old or more. Out of the 33 cabinet ministers, 18 including the prime minister and ministers holding the critical portfolios of home, defense, and finance are above 65 years. Of ministers in the entire union council of ministers, 59 percent are above 60 years of age (Tables 5.21 and 5.22). In other words, the top leadership continues to be in the hands of the gerontocracy. While Manmohan Singh was 71 years old when he became prime minister of India for the first time in 2004, British Prime Minister David Cameron was just 43 when he assumed office in Table 5.21: Age Profile of Ministers of Union Government in India Age Average age of union council of ministers

59

Median age of union council of ministers

59

Average age of cabinet ministers

65

Average age of minister of state (independent charge)

54

Average age of minister of state

55

Age of present prime minister

80

Age of present youngest minister

35

Age of present oldest minister

75

Source: Government of India Web site (for date of birth). Note: Age in years, as on December 31, 2012.

102 Shreyas Sardesai Table 5.22: Proportion of Union Ministers in Different Age Groups Age Group

No. of Ministers

Share of Union Council of Ministers (%)

0

0

25–29 years 30–39 years

4

5

40–49 years

15

19

50–59 years

22

27

60–69 years

25

31

70–79 years

14

17

1

1

80 years and above

Source: Government of India Web site (for date of birth). Note: Age in years, as on December 31, 2012.

2010, and Barack Obama was 47 when he became president of the United States in 2009. The average age of Indian prime ministers since 1947 is 64.7 years. In comparison, the average age of UK prime ministers since 1951 is 55.5, of US presidents since 1945 is 55.7, of French presidents since 1958 is 58.5, and that of German chancellors since 1949 is 58.5 years (Table 5.23). It must, however, be pointed out that none of these countries have set an upper age limit for contesting elections or for running for high office. Table 5.23: Average Age of Heads of Government in Various Countries Country

Position

Year Since

Average Age (years)

India

Prime Minister

1947

64.7

United Kingdom

Prime Minister

1951

55.5

United States of America

President

1945

55.7

France

President

1959

58.5

Germany

Chancellor

1949

58.5

Source: wikipedia.org. Note: Average age calculated based on the age of the head of government at the start date of her/his first term.

Issues of Electoral Reforms 103

The main criticism of setting a maximum age limit for contesting elections is that it is antidemocratic and that it discounts the merits of age, experience, and maturity. Critics argue that in a country where many join politics at a later stage, it would be wrong to expect them to retire at 65 like other professionals. It is also argued that politics is not a profession and should not be treated like other jobs, and that it is up to political parties to encourage young leaders and decide when a particular senior is liable to make mistakes and deny him a ticket for contesting elections. On the question of debarring those above the age of 65 years from contesting elections, the study reveals that while more people are in favor of such a move than against, the support is not as high as in the case of right to recall, right to reject, and compulsory voting. The support for prohibiting those over 65 years from contesting elections is stronger among the youth (18–25 years and 26–33 years) compared to the others (34+ years). The support for such a move is expectedly least among those aged 60 years and above, but even here interestingly, a fairly high percentage of people, that is about 33 percent, are in favor of making 65 years the cutoff age limit for contesting elections (Table 5.24). Table 5.25 shows that urban areas are slightly more supportive of a move to disallow people from contesting elections based on their age, than rural areas. Within both the localities there is a clear age difference, with the youth being more supportive of the idea to fix an upper age limit of 65 years for fighting elections, Table 5.24: Moderate Support for Setting an Upper Age Limit for Contesting Elections Idea of Debarring Those above 65 from Contesting Elections Age Category

Support

Oppose

18–25 years

51

35

26–33 years

48

35

34+ years

42

36

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

104 Shreyas Sardesai Table 5.25: Urban Areas Slightly More in Favor of Fixing an Upper Age Limit for Fighting Elections Idea of Debarring Those above 65 from Contesting Elections Support

Oppose

Rural 18–25 years

50

34

Rural 26–33 years

44

35

Rural 34+ years

41

35

Urban 18–25 years

53

39

Urban 26–33 years

58

36

Urban 34+ years

44

40

Locality and Age

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

compared to those above 34 years. The support for such an idea is strongest among urban residents aged between 26 and 33 years. In fact, their support for the idea exceeds the support shown by their rural counterparts from the same age group by a wide margin. On the other hand, the gap in terms of percentage of people who support recall among rural and urban 18–25-yearolds, and rural and urban 34+ years, is fairly small. The strongest opposition to the idea of fixing a maximum age for contesting elections is found almost equally among urban respondents aged between 18 and 25 years, and 34 years and above. Educated youth are more supportive of debarring those above 65 years from taking part in elections compared to the nonliterates. Nonliterates are least opinionated on this issue. Among the educated youth, those who are primary school pass and high school pass are more supportive of the idea of barring older contestants from elections as compared to those who are college educated (Table 5.26). An interesting finding of the study is that a majority of those who feel that the young can govern better than the old are in favor of fixing a maximum age for contesting elections. While this support is seen among both youth and others who hold this view,

Issues of Electoral Reforms 105

Table 5.26: Moderately Educated Youth Most Supportive of Setting an Upper Age Limit for Contesting Elections

Level of Educational Attainment

Idea of Debarring Those above 65 from Contesting Elections Support

Oppose

Nonliterate youth

55

18

Primary- school-pass youth

72

14

High-school-pass youth

72

16

College-educated youth

68

17

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

it is slightly higher among the former. Conversely, among those who feel that the young need not necessarily be better administrators than the old, the support for such a move is less. In fact, nearly half of such respondents feel that in a democracy it would be unfair to debar people from contesting elections on the basis of their age (Table 5.27). Table 5.27: Greater Support for Setting an Upper Age Limit for Fighting Elections among Those Who Feel Young Govern Better than Old

Opinion on Age Influence on Governance

Idea of Debarring Those above 65 from Contesting Elections Support

Oppose

Youth who feel that young can govern better than old

59

32

Youth who feel young may not govern better than old

38

50

Others who feel young can govern better than the old

54

44

Others who feel young may not govern better than old

41

46

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

106 Shreyas Sardesai

The Big Picture Overall, of all the four electoral reform ideas (right to recall, right to reject, compulsory voting, and fixing an upper age limit for contesting elections) about which opinion was sought separately during the survey, the reform idea that gets the highest approval from both the youth and the older respondents is the right to recall. The reform measure which has the lowest approval is the one that would set an upper age limit of 65 years for contesting elections (Table 5.28). In order to gauge the level of support for electoral and political reforms among different sections of society, an index was created using all the four electoral reform ideas on which questions were asked during the survey (The Index of Electoral Reform). 3 Overall, the level of support for electoral and political reforms is fairly strong among both youth and others. While three-fourths of the youth fall in the moderate and high support categories (the former outweighing the latter), the figure for others is 65 percent. Older people, in fact, show high ambivalence on the entire issue (Table 5.29). Table 5.30 shows that support for electoral reforms is much higher in urban areas than in villages. In urban areas, it is even higher among the youth, with nearly 9 out of 10 young people residing in cities and towns supporting electoral reforms, either moderately or strongly. Others (34+ years) residing in rural Table 5.28: Right to Recall Gets Highest Approval Idea of Right to Recall

Idea of Idea of Right to Compulsory Reject Voting

Idea of Debarring Those above 65 from Contesting Elections

Approval among youth

69

60

60

50

Approval among others

57

53

52

42

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

Issues of Electoral Reforms 107

Table 5.29: Support for Electoral Reforms, Particularly among Youth Level of Support for Electoral Reforms High Support

Moderate Support

Oppose

Ambivalent

Youth

33

42

13

13

Others

25

40

15

21

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Figures may not add up as a result of rounding. Table 5.30: Urban Areas More Supportive of Electoral Reforms Level of Support for Electoral Reforms High Support

Moderate Support

Oppose

Ambivalent

Rural youth

29

43

13

16

Rural others

24

38

14

23

Urban youth

43

39

13

5

Urban others

26

44

16

14

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Figures may not add up as a result of rounding.

areas are found to be most ambivalent on the issue, followed by rural youth. Much more than women, men—young and old—are supportive of electoral reforms. Table 5.31 shows that compared to young women, not only are young men (18–33 years) more in favor of electoral reforms but even men aged 34 years and above are stronger in their approval of electoral reforms. Among women, for electoral reform, those aged between 18 and 33 years show much higher support compared to those aged 34 years and above. In fact, the latter not only show the highest opposition to electoral reforms but are also the most uncertain. In terms of economic classes, we find that approval for electoral reforms among the youth rises as we go up the economic ladder. The support for reforms is the lowest among youth who are poor. They are also the most ambivalent on the issue.

108 Shreyas Sardesai Table 5.31: Compared to Women, Men Show High Support for Reforms Level of Support for Electoral Reforms High Support

Moderate Support

Oppose

Ambivalent

39

43

11

8

Young men Other men

31

44

13

13

Young women

24

40

16

19

Other women

18

34

17

31

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Figures may not add up as a result of rounding.

The support is highest among youth belonging to the upper class, followed by those from the middle and lower classes, who show a high degree of moderate support (Table 5.32). And finally, when we look at the entire issue in terms of political preferences, we find that there is not much difference between the opinions of supporters of the Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on this issue. Young supporters of both the parties are strongly in favor of reforming the electoral system and show a similar pattern. The young supporters of Left parties, however, are not fully convinced; a lesser degree of high support for reforms and a greater degree of opposition plus ambivalence can be seen among them (Table 5.33). Table 5.32: Electoral Reforms Supported by Youth from Upper and Middle Classes More than Those from Lower and Poor Classes Level of Support for Electoral Reforms High Support

Moderate Support Oppose Ambivalent

Upper-class youth

43

38

13

7

Middle-class youth

34

46

13

7

Lower-class youth

34

41

12

12

Poor youth

21

39

14

26

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Figures may not add up as a result of rounding.

Issues of Electoral Reforms 109

Table 5.33: Young Left Supporters More Skeptical of Electoral Reforms than Young Congress and BJP Supporters Level of Support for Electoral Reforms High Support

Moderate Support

Oppose

Ambivalent

Young Congress supporters

37

42

10

10

Young BJP supporters

38

43

7

12

Young Left supporters

25

43

16

16

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Figures may not add up as a result of rounding.

Conclusion There is fairly strong support among both youth and others for the radical ideas of electoral reform. In fact, there is more support, than opposition, for all four electoral reform ideas suggested during the study. For once, the youth stand out as a distinct category from others and the support for all four electoral reform ideas is higher among the youth compared to the older people, across demographic categories. Taken together, three-fourths of the youth show moderate and high support for all four electoral reform ideas suggested to them. Among the youth, support for reform measures is highest among the 18–25 years age group, except for the right to reject, which gets greater support among the 26–33-year-olds. Of all the four electoral reforms covered in the study, support for right to recall is the highest among both young and old. Of all the four electoral reforms, the support for setting an upper age limit of 65 years for contesting elections is the lowest, among both young and old. The support for all four electoral reforms is higher in cities and towns, compared to villages. Overall, approval for radical electoral reforms is strongest among youth who are educated, live in urban areas, and are economically better off.

110 Shreyas Sardesai

Notes and References Notes 1.

2.

3.

In 2009, the question was worded slightly differently. These were the exact words: “If people are not satisfied with their MP/MLA they should have the right to call back their representative even before the five-year term is over. Tell me whether you agree or disagree.” In 2009, the question was worded slightly differently. These were the exact words: “While casting their vote, voters should have a choice to vote for none of the candidates if they do not like anyone. Tell me whether you agree or disagree.” Index of Electoral Reform: This Index was created so as to measure respondents’ stance on four electoral reforms: right to reject, right to recall, compulsory voting, and upper age limit for contesting elections. The questions used to create this index were Q5a, Q5b, Q5c, and Q25d of the Youth study questionnaire. Responses to all these questions were collated and ordered into four categories: “Ambivalent,” “Oppose,” “Moderate support,” and “High support.” “Ambivalent” included the following: those who had no opinion on all four reforms; had no opinion on three reforms, and agreed with one reform; had no opinion on three reforms and disagreed with one reform; and had no opinion on two reforms, supported one reform, and opposed one reform. “Oppose” included the following: those who disagreed with all four reforms; disagreed with three reforms and agreed with one reform; disagreed with three reforms and had no opinion on one reform; disagreed with two reforms, agreed with one reform and had no opinion on one reform; and disagreed with two reforms and had no opinion on two reforms. “Moderate support” included the following: those who agreed with three reforms and disagreed with one reform; agreed with two reforms and disagreed with two reforms; agreed with two reforms, disagreed with one reform, and had no opinion on one reform; and agreed with two reforms and had no opinion on two reforms. “High support” included those who agreed with all four reforms, and those who agreed with three reforms and had no opinion on one reform.

References Association for Democratic Reforms and National Election Watch. 2011. ADR/NEW Recommendations for Electoral Reforms. Retrieved from http://adrindia.org.

Issues of Electoral Reforms 111

Bhanu, Vinod. 2008. “Right to Recall Legislators, the Chhattisgarh Experiment,” Economic and Political Weekly, 43 (40). Retrieved from http://epw.in/epw/uploads/articles/12717.pdf. ———. 2011. “Called into Account,” Hindustan Times, September 2. Retrieved from http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/Print/ 740899.aspx. Blais, André. 2006. “What Affects Voter Turnout?” Annual Review of Political Science, 9: 111–25. Chatterjee, Somnath. 2007. “Address at the Host Branch Plenary Session on Right to Recall as a Strategy for Enforcing Greater Accountability of Parliaments to the People,” 53rd Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference, New Delhi, September 28. New Delhi: Office of the Speaker of Lok Sabha. Retrieved from http://speakerloksabha.nic.in/ Speech/SpeechDetails.asp?SpeechId=239. Dasgupta, Manas. 2010. “Gujarat Governor Returns Compulsory Voting Bill,” The Hindu, April 17. Retrieved from http://www.thehindu.com/ news/national/other-states/gujarat-governor-returns-compulsoryvoting-bill/article402138.ece, accessed on September 29, 2013. Davis, Gray. 2003. “Total Recall,” The Economist, June 19, 2003. Retrieved from http://ww3.economist.com/node/1861491, accessed on September 29, 2013. Election Commission of India. 2004. Proposed Electoral Reforms. Retrieved from http://eci.nic.in/eci_main/PROPOSED_ELECTORAL_REFORMS. pdf. Electoral Commission, The (United Kingdom). 2006. Compulsory Voting around the World. Retrieved from http://www.electoralcommission. org.uk/__data/assets/electoral_commission_pdf_file/0020/16157/ ECCompVotingfinal_22225-16484__E__N__S__W__.pdf. Frankal, Elliot. 2005. “Compulsory Voting around the World,” The Guardian, July 4. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/ jul/04/voterapathy.uk, accessed on September 29, 2013. Gay, Oonagh and Charley Coleman. 2011. “Recall Elections,” House of Commons Library, UK online. Retrieved from http://www.parliament. uk/documents/commons/lib/research/briefings/snpc-05089.pdf. Ghatwai, Milind. 2011. “Madhya Pradesh a Lab for 10 Years, with Mixed Results,” The Indian Express, August 31. Retrieved from http://www. indianexpress.com/news/madhya-pradesh-a-lab-for-10-yrs-withmixed-results/839660/, accessed on September 29, 2013. International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA). 2008. Direct Democracy: The International IDEA Handbook. Retrieved from http://www.idea.int/publications/direct_ democracy/upload/direct_democracy_handbook_chapter5.pdf.

112 Shreyas Sardesai Jackman, Robert W. 1987. “Political Institutions and Voter Turnout in Industrial Democracies,” American Political Science Review, 81 (2): 405–24. Jha, Giridhar. 2011. “Bihar Gets Right to Recall Corporators,” India Today, March 29. Reterived from http://indiatoday.intoday. in/story/urban-civic-polls-bihar-gets-right-to-recall-electedrepresentatives/1/133688.html, accessed on September 29, 2013. John, Joseph. 2008. “For first time, votes cast to recall elected leaders, results to be out tomorrow,” June 16, Raipur. Retrieved from http:// www.indianexpress.com/news/for-first-time-votes-cast-to-recallelected-leaders-results-to-be-out-tomorrow/323224/, accessed on September 29, 2013. Law Ministry (India). 2011. “Gist of suggestion released on electoral reforms.” Retrieved from lawmin.nic.in/legislative/ereforms/ suggestions-received.doc. ———. n.d. The Conduct of Election Rules, 1961. Retrieved from http:// lawmin.nic.in/ld/subord/cer1.htm. Lijphart, Arend. 1997. “Unequal Participation: Democracy’s Unresolved Dilemma,” American Political Science Review, 91 (1): 1–11. Madhavan, M. R. 2011. “Recall Option,” The Indian Express, March 31. Retrieved from http://www.indianexpress.com/news/recall-option/ 769412/. Mahapatra, Dhananjay. 2011. “Can’t Take Away Right to Recall, SC Tells Punjab,” The Times of India, May 28. Retrieved from http://articles. timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-05-28/india/29594431_1_ sarpanch-panchayat-members-motion, accessed on September 29, 2013. Mukherjee, Krittivas. 2010. “PM Wants to Cut Average Age of His Cabinet,” Reuters, September 6. Retrieved from http://in.reuters.com/ article/2010/09/06/idINIndia-51309020100906, accessed on September 29, 2013. Outlook. 2011. “Gujarat Assembly: Compulsory Voting Bill Passed Again,” Outlook, February 28. Retrieved from http://news.outlookindia.com/ items.aspx?artid=713453, accessed on September 29, 2013. Packel, Daniel. 2008. “Electoral Institutions and Local Government Accountability: A Literature Review,” Social Development Working Papers (Local Governance and Accountability Series), Paper No. 111, July. Washington, DC: The World Bank. Palshikar, Suhas. 2011. “Why the Right to Recall is Flawed,” The Indian Express, September 14. Retrieved from http://www.indianexpress. com/news/why-the-right-to-recall-is-flawed/846143/1.

Issues of Electoral Reforms 113

Research Foundation for Governance in India. 2010. Analysis of Compulsory Voting in Gujarat. Ahmedabad. Retrieved from http://www.rfgindia. org/publications/Analysis of Compulsory Voting in Gujarat.pdf. Sorabjee, Soli. 2011. “It’s a Tightrope Walk,” Hindustan Times, September 1. Retrieved from http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/ Print/740561.aspx, accessed on September 1, 2011. Subaiya, Lekha and Dhananjay W. Bansod. 2011. “Demographics of Population Ageing in India: Trends and Differentials,” BKPAI Working Paper, Paper No. 1, United Nations Population Fund, New Delhi. Retrieved from http://www.isec.ac.in/BKPAI Working paper 1.pdf, accessed on September 29, 2013. Swain, Satya Ranjan. 2010. “Right of Negative Voting,” JurisOnline.in, February 16. Retrieved from http://jurisonline.in/?p=1117. The Economic Times. 2011a. “Electoral Reforms: Right to Recall Practical Only When Electorate Is Small, Say Former Election Commissioners,” The Economic Times, September 1. Retrieved from http://articles. economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-09-01/news/29953647_1_ electoral-reforms-indrajit-gupta-committee-state-funding, accessed on September 29, 2013. ———. 2011b. “Right to Reject Candidates a Ticklish Affair: Chief Election Commissioner,” The Economic Times, August 29. Retrieved from http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-08-29/ news/29941508_1_candidates-commissioner-s-y-quraishi-pollauthority, accessed on September 29, 2013. The Hindu. 2011a. “Rajasthan Amends Act, Makes Provision for Recall of Mayors,” The Hindu, March 25. Retrieved from http://www.hindu. com/2011/03/25/stories/2011032559990400.htm, accessed on September 29, 2013. ———. 2011b. “Hazare’s Suggestion for Recall of MP Impractical: Quraishi,” The Hindu, September 21. Retrieved from http://www.thehindu.com/ news/national/hazares-suggestion-for-recall-of-mp-impracticalquraishi/article2473132.ece, accessed on September 29, 2013. The Indian Express. 2008. “Right to Recall,” The Indian Express online, June 17. The Sentinel. 2011. “The Concept of Negative Voting,” The Sentinel, May 3. Retrieved from https://www.verifiedvoting.org/india-the-conceptof-negative-voting-the-sentinel/, accessed on September 29, 2013.

6 Politics as a Career: Perception and Choice Sanjay Kumar

“

The biggest problem is that politics is out of reach of the ordinary youth of the country.” This was a candid admission made by none other than Congress leader Rahul Gandhi when he addressed a gathering of young men and women in October 2011 in New Delhi (Naqshbandi 2011). Ten months earlier in Aurangabad (in Maharashtra), the young leader had made a passionate appeal to the youth to give at least 10 years of their life to politics. Addressing the youth in January 2011, Rahul had said, “I assure you, after 10 years, you will be proud of your decision, and the country’s politics will take a new direction” (The Economic Times online 2011). Time and again, the 41-year-old scion of the Nehru–Gandhi family, who is viewed by many as India’s future prime minister, has been urging young Indians to take greater interest in politics and even join it. However, his efforts have been reported to have had a negligible impact by some sections of the media (Singh 2010). While some of the blame for this could be put on the inability of political parties to galvanize the youth, a bigger factor seems to be the growing negative image of politics among the youth. An opinion poll of young Indians between the

Politics as a Career

115

ages of 18 and 25 years conducted by the news magazine India Today in September 2011 found that there was deep pessimism among the youth about politics, with politicians emerging as the least trustworthy when compared to bureaucrats, nongovernmental organization (NGO) workers, private sector executives, journalists, and judges (Nayyar 2011). At a focus group discussion organized in Ajmer (in Rajasthan) in January 2011, as part of the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) study, several youngsters expressed a somewhat similar sentiment. “Every youth wants to get into politics, but when I contested an election while doing my graduation, I saw the role of money and muscle power. My existence was negligible,” said a young student from the city. Another participant added, “We would want to come into politics if it allows us to stay honest. But not if we get the image of current politicians and have to sacrifice our values to get a high position.” Clearly, there is a growing caution, and even contempt, among many young Indians toward traditional politicians and the democratic processes they preside over. Political participation is broadly of two types: indirect political participation and direct political participation. Indirect political participation could be in the form of participation in protests, demonstrations, election rallies, or election campaigns. Direct political participation, on the other hand, refers to either being an office-bearer of a political party or contesting elections. In the earlier chapters we have seen that the youth are now not only more aware of political issues but also participate in political activities with greater zeal. The pertinent question that follows from this is whether this increased political activity among the youth has had any impact on their perception of politics as a career. Do the youth really want to opt for politics as their career if they get a chance? This chapter attempts to throw some light on this question. In order to give a broader explanation, the chapter has been divided into four sections. The first section looks at general attitudes and perceptions about careers that are prevalent amongst Indian youth. An effort has been made to create an occupational hierarchy and to locate the option of “politics as a career” in that hierarchy. The subsequent section analyzes whether the findings of the study comply with the general perceptions about

116 Sanjay Kumar

career or show a contradictory trend among the youth regarding politics as a career choice. The third section offers an explanation on youth perceptions on the issue of politics as a career choice. The last section focuses on gender aspects and whether young women are attracted toward a political career.

Career Options for Youth: General Attitudes and Perceptions A substantial section of the Indian population is under the age of 35 years. In a sense, therefore, the political majority lies with the youth. Lots of hopes and expectations have been placed on them to take the country forward in a new direction. It is widely believed that the youth can provide an answer to the ills that plague the Indian political system. The massive participation of the youth, ranging from school students to university/college students, in the anticorruption movement led by Anna Hazare as well as in the protest against the gruesome rape of a young girl in Delhi in December 2012 confirms the importance of the youth as agents of action and change in society. There is no denying that there is a general attitude of cynicism for politics and political institutions in the society as a whole, including among the youth. But even in the midst of all this cynicism, around one-third of the youth are willing to take up politics as a career. When asked during the CSDS study if they would like to make politics their career given a chance, 34 percent of the youth showed interest, 54 percent declined, and 12 percent were neither for nor against a political career (Table 6.1). The figure of 34 percent is not all that high, but at a time of globalization and market-driven career choices, it is quite significant. However, what we must keep in mind is that there is a big difference between merely expressing an opinion on politics as a career option and actually opting for it. If we look at the career preferences in India, politics figures very low in the hierarchy of career choices of the youth. Our educational system and pattern are such that the youth are hardly motivated or trained for a

Politics as a Career

117

Table 6.1: One-third of Indian Youth Willing to Opt for Politics as a Career Interest in Choosing Politics as Career Option Youth

Interested

Not Interested

No Opinion

34

54

12

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

career in politics. But this is not just because of general disinterest of the youth in politics, but due to lack of avenues and incentives to make it a career. In 2006, a study titled Work Orientations and Responses to Career Choices: Indian Regional Survey (WORCC-IRS) (Arulmani and Nag-Arulmani 2006), conducted by the Promise Foundation in partnership with the Sir Ratan Tata Trust, brought some interesting findings regarding the attitudes and perceptions among the youth regarding their careers. The study was conducted keeping in mind the impact of globalization on the Indian economy in general and labor market in particular. It also aimed to record the perceptions among the youth (14–21 years) regarding the nature of employment opportunities available to them.1 The findings indicated that most of the young, across all socioeconomic backgrounds, said that they would be interested in engaging in full-time study after school. The opinion belonged mostly to the upper-middle socioeconomic status groups. Among the lower socioeconomic status groups, many young people mentioned that they would prefer to work part time along with studying. From the survey, it has been found that a large proportion of the Indian youth feels that higher education is more prestigious because it can lead to higher emoluments and social prestige. This is the reason why a large majority of the young people prefers to pursue higher education. The career choices of the youth are almost similar across various social backgrounds. In the occupational hierarchy, science-oriented professions are on top. Blue-collared professions are lower in the professional hierarchy. The most preferred occupation is that of a scientist followed by computer scientist, engineer, doctor, and teacher. The least sought after professions are chef, cook, farmer, shopkeeper, and carpenter, in decreasing order of preference. What

118 Sanjay Kumar

is interesting to observe is that in this long list of career choices, politics does not figure at all. Most of the professions are those which are driven by market demands. In another survey conducted by the Tata Consultancy Services, primarily amongst urban youth, the results were on similar lines. This survey was conducted in 2008–09 among around 14,000 children across 12 cities. When asked about preferred career choices, engineering emerged as the most popular career option. Information technology emerged as the second most preferred career (Tata Consultancy Services 2009). The results of these two surveys clearly indicate that the career choices of the youth are largely governed by market forces. The Indian youth are inclined more toward professions with relatively high market demand. This is because there is a greater possibility of earning high salaries from such market-oriented professions. It seems that a profession such as politics is not being considered by the Indian youth and a reason for this could be that politics cannot promise security of job/work, and in the initial years it cannot even guarantee a reasonably decent salary every month. What is more, the influence of money and muscle power has meant that only those belonging to financially welloff families can take the risk of joining politics. Rohit Chaudhury, national president of the National Students Union of India, made a similar point during a focus group discussion organized for our study. He was of the opinion that “if a youth aspires to enter politics, s/he should have the full support from her/his family in terms of assets and money.”

Survey Findings for Career in Politics Despite these limitations, our study indicates that the youth have not lost all hope. Their present condition might not show the popularity of politics as a career, but if they are given an opportunity, they are willing to make a career in politics. We can analyze this perception of the youth in two contexts. The first context is defined by their socioeconomic status such as locality,

Politics as a Career

119

educational qualification, economic class, and gender. These are some of the important determinants which can affect the decision of the youth while making a career choice. The other important context affecting the career choice of the youth are their attitudinal/behavioral tendencies such as taking interest in politics, discussing politics and political institutions, taking part in electoral activities, and membership of political organizations. Let us take a look at the first context and begin with the rural–urban divide. Our study shows that compared to the rural youth, the youth living in towns and cities are more interested in making politics as a career. Forty-one percent of the urban youth said that they would like to make politics their career, compared to 31 percent of the rural youth—a clear 10 percentage point gap (Table 6.2). If we look at it in terms of gender then the gap is even bigger, with young men looking at the issue very differently from young women. While 41 percent of young men are open to a career in politics, among young women the figure falls to 24 percent. However, when seen in terms of locality, this difference between young men and young women narrows down considerably in urban areas. Forty-three percent of young men in urban areas are interested in making politics their career as compared to 38 percent of young urban women, a difference of just five percentage points. In rural areas, the difference is a huge 20 percent (Table 6.3). More educated youth in both rural as well urban areas say that they would like to make politics their career. As the level of education increases, the difference between the opinions of rural youth and urban youth decreases, on the issue of politics as a Table 6.2: Urban Youth More Inclined toward a Career in Politics Interest in Politics as Career Locality

Interested

Not Interested

Rural Youth

31

55

Urban Youth

41

52

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

120 Sanjay Kumar Table 6.3: Across Locality, Young Men More Likely to Choose Politics as Career Young Men Interested in Politics as Career

Young Women Interested in Politics as Career

Rural

40

20

Urban

43

38

Locality

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

career. College-educated youth in both rural as well urban areas show almost equal inclination for the idea of politics as a career. At the same time, it must be pointed out that while urban youth are more open to the idea irrespective of their education levels, the same cannot be said for rural youth. Only 20 percent of the nonliterate, rural youth are open to the idea of making politics their career. Among urban, nonliterate youth the figure stands at 42 percent (Table 6.4). When analyzed in terms of economic class, we find that the youth from the middle class are most in favor of making a career in politics. Forty-one percent of the youth from the middle class say that they would like to make a career in politics, followed by 39 percent of the youth from the upper class. Compared to this, only 31 percent of the youth from the lower class and 27 percent of the youth who are poor are open to the idea of a political career (Table 6.5). Table 6.4: Education Bridges the Rural–Urban Divide Level of Educational Attainment

Rural Youth Interested Urban Youth Interested in Politics as Career in Politics as Career

Nonliterate youth

20

42

Primary-school-pass youth

24

34

High-school-pass youth

31

42

College-educated youth

40

42

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

Politics as a Career

121

Table 6.5: Middle-class Youth Most Interested in Politics as Career Interested in Politics as Career

Not Interested in Politics as Career

Upper class

39

48

Middle class

41

47

Lower class

31

58

Poor class

27

58

Economic Class

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

More than socioeconomic factors, attitudinal factors such as interest in politics may perhaps explain this issue even better. We can see in Table 6.6 that 62 percent of the youth with a great deal of interest in politics say that they would like to make career in politics if they are given an opportunity, whereas there are only 16 percent youth with no interest in politics who are interested in doing the same. Meanwhile, those with a moderate interest in politics are moderately interested in choosing politics as their career choice. In other words, as the level of interest in politics decreases among the youth, their willingness to make politics their career also decreases. Similarly in Table 6.7, we can see that youth who take part in election-related activities are more interested in making politics their career, than those who do not take part in electoral activities. As the level of participation in election-related Table 6.6: Interest in Politics Makes Youth More Open to Politics as Career Interest in Politics

Youth Interested in Politics as Career

Great deal of interest

62

Moderate interest

41

No interest

16

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

122 Sanjay Kumar Table 6.7: Participation in Election Campaign Activities Has Positive Relationship with Politics as Career Choice Participation in Election-related Activities

Youth Interested in Politics as Career

Nil

28

Moderate

43

High

54

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

activities goes up, the interest in making politics their career also increases. Amongst Indian youth who do not participate in any election campaign activities, 28 percent would like to make politics their career while amongst youth who actively participate in election campaign activities, 54 percent are willing to choose politics as their career option. Hence, greater the participation in election-related activities, higher is the preference amongst the Indian youth for politics as a career. Political awareness among youth is also an important factor in building an opinion in favor of a career in politics. In Table 6.8, we can see that as the level of political awareness among the youth increases, their willingness to make politics their career also increases, and vice versa. Twenty-seven percent of the youth with no political awareness say that they would make a career in politics compared to 49 percent of the youth with high political awareness. Table 6.8: Politically Aware Youth More Inclined to Join Politics Level of Political Awareness Nil

Interested in Politics as Career 27

Low

29

Medium

35

High

49

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

Politics as a Career

123

Table 6.9: Youth Who Are Most Likely to Make Politics Their Career Attribute

Interested in Politics as Career

Frequently discuss political institutions

58

Believe in vote efficacy

46

Has been member of political party

45

Has been member of student wing of political party

41

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Note: All figures are in percent.

The study also indicates that besides interest and awareness about politics, and participation in election-related activities, there are other important factors which have a positive influence on youth’s choice of politics as a preferred career. Findings suggest (Table 6.9) that the youth who discuss politics frequently are more inclined to make politics their career as compared to those who never discuss politics. Amongst youth who discuss politics frequently, 58 percent mentioned that they would be willing to make politics their career if they were given an opportunity. Similarly, a large proportion of those youth who believe in the efficacy of their vote also wants to make a career in politics. Youth who are members of a political party or members of the student wing of a political party are also more likely to pursue a career in politics than those who are not.

Reasons for Not Making Career in Politics Having looked at those who are open to a career in politics, let’s now look at those who aren’t. As mentioned earlier, the survey finding reveals that 54 percent of youth do not show any interest in making politics their career. When asked to give the reasons for their unwillingness to make a career in politics, 69 percent answered they have no interest in politics. Some of the youth said they are interested but disillusioned with politics, and some others said they are interested but they have no connections in politics (Table 6.10).

124 Sanjay Kumar Table 6.10: Reasons Dissuading Youth from Choosing Politics as Career No Interest in Politics

Interested but Disillusioned with Politics

All youth

69

10

8

Young men

68

13

10

Category of Youth

Interested but No Connections in Politics

Young women

70

8

7

Rural youth

68

9

9

Urban youth

72

14

6

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

In addition to the general pessimistic image of politics and politicians, there are several other factors that dissuade the youth from opting for politics as a career. These factors are the increasing importance and dominance of dynasties in Indian politics (as discussed in the previous chapters), crackdown on student unions across the country, and the lack of avenues for developing a career in politics. In recent years, university-level students’ politics, which is considered as the cradle of politicians, has come under a severe scanner of the judiciary and the government (Ramachandran 2006). This in itself is not a hindrance. However, the authorities brought some severe regulations for students’ politics due to which most of the unions within colleges and universities became almost defunct for some time. For instance, the Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union elections, which had always been conducted by the students without any interference of the administration, were stayed by the Supreme Court in 2008, citing violations of the 2006 Lyngdoh committee’s recommendations on how students’ union elections in educational institutions should be conducted. The stay continued for four years during which period no elections were held on the campus, thus affecting student political activity. It would be wrong to look at politics and political career in the traditional sense alone. Politics is not just about becoming a leader or a neta. There are other opportunities within the

Politics as a Career

125

political domain as well. If we look at the western democracies, the domain of politics in terms of a career is fairly well developed (Sahadi 2005) owing to transparency, decentralization, and corporatization of electoral campaigns. In India, at the moment, running electoral campaigns is solely a party affair and is mostly centralized and dictated by the key members of the party. As a result of this, elections in India are closed affairs as only the handful of people who enjoy association and trust of senior party members get a chance to show their skills. Youth without any significant political connection find it extremely difficult to show their talent. However, this field is gradually developing in India. In some of the elections held over the last five to ten years, we can see that political parties have engaged experts for the planning and management of their election campaigns. The first instance of this initiative came during the 2004 general election, when the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the then ruling party, used the expertise of a professional company, Grey Worldwide India, for their entire campaign. The slogan “India Shining” was also suggested by them. In response to this massive campaign, the Congress party also hired a professional group to counter the campaign of the ruling government. The Congress hired Orchard Advertising, the Indian branch of the US-based advertising company Leo Burnett (IBS Centre for Management Research 2004). This is a very important development from the perspective of the youth as such initiatives would create alternative avenues for the youth to develop a career in politics, albeit indirectly. This step was in a way significant in the history of Indian electioneering as it created a new trend of professionalism in how elections are fought. State assembly elections over the years have also seen the involvement of professional campaigners and statisticians. Students from Harvard, Indian Institute of Technology, and Tata Institute of Social Sciences helped strategize for Nitish Kumar’s campaign during the Bihar assembly election of 2010 (Mishra 2010). In 2012, the Congress handed over the responsibility of the entire 2012 assembly election campaigns for the states of Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand to Percept/H, a leading advertising company (Singh 2010). This professionalization is not only limited to mainstream politics but has also entered the domain of

126 Sanjay Kumar

political activism. Recently, young journalists, software experts, public relations professionals, and management executives were involved in Anna Hazare’s anticorruption movement (IANS 2011). Such developments, although at an infant stage, can gradually become important channels for the youth to make an entry into politics, especially for those who do not have any political family background. This is because in such professions, mere technical knowledge and managerial skills are not enough. To succeed, one needs a sound grounding in the political system and ground realities. Youth who are, in the formative years of their career, interested in making a career in politics can offer their knowledge and services to the political parties and can gradually work their way upward in party hierarchy. This practice is more common in western democracies where commercialization and professionalization are more accomplished. With the opening up of the Indian economy to corporate firms, such avenues have developed and are expected to grow further in India as well.

Women and Politics: Opinions of Young Women on Politics as Career Option In contemporary Indian politics, women are or have been at the helm of several prestigious political positions. Among them are the former president of India, Pratibha Devi Singh Patil, the president of the Congress party, Sonia Gandhi, the leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha, Sushma Swaraj, the chief minister of Delhi, Sheila Dikshit, the former chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, Mayawati, the chief minister of Tamil Nadu, Jayalalithaa, the chief minister of West Bengal, Mamata Banerjee, and the speaker of the Lok Sabha, Meira Kumar. Given the presence of such prominent women politicians, one cannot be absolutely incorrect in assuming that their achievements might have helped in encouraging and mobilizing more young women in politics. Hence, it would be interesting to see if this fact/reality has actually encouraged young women to take up active politics. Our study, for instance,

Politics as a Career

127

reveals that almost one-fourth of the total number of young women indicated their willingness to choose politics as their career. This is not too high but not dismal either. What is more, not only has the proportion of women in the Lok Sabha been increasing over the years, albeit gradually, but also the number of women aspiring to become members of Parliament (MPs) and members of legislative assemblies (MLAs) has gone up. Figures clearly indicate that since the first elections in 1952, there has been a steady increase in the number of women contestants in Lok Sabha and Assembly elections (Table 6.11). In 1952, 2.3 percent of all the candidates who had contested Lok Sabha and Assembly elections were women. By 1998, this number had gone up to 5.4 percent. Our study indicates that amongst young women with an interest in politics, a large proportion is interested in making politics their career. Even amongst women having some interest in politics, the urban women with some interest in politics are more likely to make politics their career as compared to their rural counterparts. The study indicates that 53 percent of urban women with some interest in politics are willing to make politics their career whereas 31 percent of young, rural women with some interest in politics are interested in making a career in politics. Education motivates women to choose politics as a career option. The study indicates that the tendency of making a career Table 6.11: Increasing Number of Women Contesting Lok Sabha and Assembly Elections Year

Women Contestants

1952

2.3

1980

3.1

1984

3.9

1991

3.7

1996

4.3

1998

5.4

Source: Mohan et al. (n.d.: 19). Note: All figures are in percent.

128 Sanjay Kumar

in politics is slightly higher among young women who have a moderate or high level of education and have at least some interest in politics, as compared to others. While 39 percent of young women who are high-school educated and who have some interest in politics indicated that given an opportunity they would like to make a career in politics, the figures among nonliterate, young women and primary-educated, young women, on the other hand, were 31 percent and 26 percent respectively (Table 6.12). In addition to this, the study also reveals that women having some degree of involvement in political activities or political discussions have a greater preference for making a career in politics. Young women who frequently discuss politics and political events are more interested in making a career in politics compared to those women who never discuss politics. Young women who are associated with political organizations such as political parties and involved in student politics are more inclined toward politics as a career. Hence, we see that any experience or interest in politics and participation in political activities are clearly motivating factors for young women in joining politics. From these findings, we can conclude that despite many odds, the perception of young women about politics, and more specifically a career in politics, is not all that pessimistic. In fact, it Table 6.12: Among Young Women with Some Interest in Politics, Education Motivates to Choose Politics as Their Career Education Motivates Women toward Politics

Interested in Politics as Career

Not Interested in Politics as Career

Nonliterate, young women with some interest in politics

31

63

Primary-educated, young women with some interest in politics

26

67

High-school-educated, young women with some interest in politics

39

51

College-educated, young women with some interest in politics

37

54

Source: Youth and Politics Survey (2011). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

Politics as a Career

129

is very encouraging. Traditionally, some fields have been considered to be “unsuitable” for women. Politics is one such field where the representation of women has been abysmal as it is seen as primarily a male domain. This attitude is slowly changing and the presence of women in politics is increasing every year. Despite the general pessimism on the issue of women’s presence in politics, women themselves do not perceive fields such as politics with pessimism. In 2008, during a survey conducted by CSDS exclusively among women, respondents were asked, whether they agreed with the statement that “politics is not meant for women.” Most women said that they disagreed with it. Sixtytwo percent of young women said that they did not think that politics was not meant for women. This means that a majority of young women believe that women are equally capable of engaging in activities such as politics. While the disagreement with the statement was strong in both rural as well as urban areas, young women from urban areas were far more emphatic in their disagreement (Table 6.13). Hence, we see that despite negative attitudes and social constraints for women to enter a field such as politics, we do not see a state of hopelessness among women over this issue. In fact, we see that as more and more women are making their mark in popular politics, young women are perhaps getting inspired to follow their footsteps. Even if popular women politicians such as Mayawati and Mamata Bannerjee have not directly appealed to the young women to take up politics as their career, these women have broken the glass ceiling for the women of the younger generation. Table 6.13: Most Women Disagree That “Politics is not meant for women” Locality

Agree

Disagree

Young, rural women

30

56

Young, urban women

24

67

Source: State of the Nation Women’s Survey (2008). Notes: 1. All figures are in percent. 2. Rest “No opinion.”

130 Sanjay Kumar

Conclusion To conclude, while a majority of the youth are against the idea of making politics their career, there is still a fairly significant proportion of youth (one-third) open to it. Among them, those residing in urban areas are more willing than their rural counterparts to make politics their career. Young men and young women look at this issue very differently, especially in rural areas. As the level of education increases, the difference between the opinions of rural youth and urban youth on the issue of politics as a career decreases. Youth from the middle class are most in favor of making a career in politics. What is also noticed is that the greater the political interest and awareness, the greater the eagerness to make politics a career. There is no doubt that entering politics has become difficult now owing to lack of money, access, and political connections. However, it is not true that the doors are closed for young aspirants without a political background. Ashok Tanwar, Mayawati, Mamata Banerjee, and Meenakshi Natarajan are very prominent examples of this. All of them have succeeded in politics despite lacking a political family background. It is due to their sheer determination and hard work that they are amongst the most influential politicians in India today. There are many youth in our country aspiring to reach these heights or at least make a breakthrough in politics. While their proportion might be much smaller than those aspiring to become doctors or engineers, it is reassuring that this section of the youth is not extinct. On the other hand, it is quite substantial in number.

Note and References Note 1.

The survey was conducted in 15 different regions of the country, and included areas with very diverse social and economic profiles. The survey covered the respondents between the ages of 14 and 21 years. Most of the respondents of the survey were in high schools, higher

Politics as a Career

131

secondary schools, or vocational schools. The sample also included a small proportion of the youth who were working or in informal training programmes. Since the major decisions regarding careers are made between the end of high school and higher secondary school years, the study was focused on this particular age group. The sample size of this survey was 3,799.

References Arulmani, Gideon and Sonali Nag-Arulmani. 2006. Work Orientations and Responses to Career Choices: Indian Regional Survey, draft report for discussion at the National Consultation on Career Psychology, Whitefield, Bangalore. Retrieved from http://www.jivacareer.org/ jiva/project/docs/Worcc-IRS.pdf. IANS. 2011. “Meet the Backroom Boys Who Power Anna’s Campaign against Corruption,” DNA India. Retrieved from http://www.dnaindia. com/india/report_meet-the-backroom-boys-who-power-anna-scampaign-against-corruption_1576633, accessed on December 21, 2011. IBS Centre for Management Research. 2004. Political Advertising: The “India Shining” Campaign (case), ICMR. Retrieved from http:// www.icmrindia.org/casestudies/catalogue/Human Resource and Organization Behavior/Political Advertising-The India Shining Campaign-Human Resource Management.htm. Mishra, Vandita. 2010. “In Nitish’ Backroom, Students from Harvard, IIT and TISS,” Indian Express. Retrieved from http://www.indianexpress. com/news/in-nitish-backroom-students-from-harvard-iit-andtiss/716132/, accessed on December 21, 2011. Mohan, Shantha, Ruth Manorama, Geetha Devi Papanna and Martha Pushpa Rani. n.d. Baseline Report: Women and Political Participation in India. Kuala Lumpur: International Women’s Rights Action Watch Asia Pacific. Retrieved from http://www.iwraw-ap.org/aboutus/pdf/ FPwomen_and_pol_pax.pdf. Naqshbandi, Aurangzeb. 2011. “Bring Politics within the Reach of the Common Folk,” Hindustan Times online, October 4. Retrieved from http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/Bringpolitics-within-the-reach-of-common-folk/Article1-753491.aspx, accessed on September 30, 2013. Nayyar, Dhiraj. 2011. “Anger and Hope,” India Today, September 16. Retrieved from http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/india-todayyouth-special-opinion-poll-corruption/1/151541.html, accessed on September 30, 2013.

132 Sanjay Kumar Ramachandran, Smriti Kak. 2006. “Campus Elections: Party Time Is over,” The Tribune, October 14. Retrieved from http://www.tribuneindia. com/2006/20061014/saturday/main1.htm, accessed on September 30, 2013. Sahadi, Jeanne. 2005. “Six-figure Jobs: Politics as a Career behind Every Great Candidate Are Consultants, Often Highly Paid Ones,” CNN. Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/2004/07/28/pf/sixfigs_six/, accessed on December 20, 2011. Singh, Anubhuti. 2012. “Percept/H Wins the Creative Mandate of Congress’ Uttar Pradesh Campaign,” Media Newsline. Retrieved from http:// www.medianewsline.com/news/120/ARTICLE/8602/2011-12-02. html, accessed on December 21, 2011. Singh, D. K. 2010. “Rahul’s ‘New Youth Cong’: Same Old Same Old,” The Indian Express, December 14. Retrieved from http://www.indianexpress. com/news/rahul-s--new-youth-cong--same-old-same-old/724398/, accessed on September 30, 2013. Tata Consultancy Services. 2009. TCS Generation Web 2.0 Trends, 2008–09. Retrieved from http://www.tcs.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/TCS_ News/TCS_PR_Generation_Web2.0_Survey_07_09.pdf, accessed on September 30, 2013. The Economic Times. 2011. “Give 10 Years to Politics, Rahul Urges Youth,” The Economic Times, 1 February. Retrieved from http://worldbiztoday. com/link/give-10-years-to-politics-rahul-urges-youth-ccad3d, accessed on September 30, 2013.

Appendix I Survey Questionnaire: Youth and Politics Survey 2011 F1. State Name: ___________________________________ F2. P.C. Name: ____________________________________ F3. A.C. Name: ___________________________________ F4. P.S. Name: ____________________________________ F5. Name of the Respondent: ____________________________________________________ F6. Address of the respondent (Give landmark): _____________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ F7. Date of interview (dd/mm/yyyy): ____________________ F8. Time of starting the interview: ___________________ F9. Name of the Investigator (Code Roll No.): ________________________________________ INVESTIGATOR’S INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF INFORMED CONSENT

My name is ______________________________ and I have come from Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (also give your University’s reference), a social science research organization in Delhi. We are doing a study on the participation of youth in Indian politics for which we are interviewing thousands of people across the country. The findings of this survey will be used for writing articles in newspapers. This survey is an independent study and is not linked to any political party or government agency. Whatever information you provide will be kept strictly confidential. Participation in this survey is voluntary and it is entierly up to you to answer or not answer any question that I ask. We hope that you will take part in this survey since your participation is important. It usually takes 30 to 40 minutes to complete this interview. Please spare some time for the interview. and help me in sucessfully completing the survey. F10. May I begin the interview now? 1. Respondent agrees to be interviewed

2. Respondent does not agree to be interviewed

134 Indian Youth and Electoral Politics INTERVIEW BEGINS Q1. a.

Q2.

b.

How much interest do you have in politics and political news – a great deal of interest, some interest 1. Great deal 2. Some interest 3. No interest 8. No Opinion or no interest How often do you discuss about the work being done by the following political institutions/entities – always discuss, discuss sometimes, or never discuss? Always Sometimes Never No opinion a. Work done by the Central govt.

1

2

3

8

b. Work done by the State govt.

1

2

3

8

c. Work done by your M.P.

1

2

3

8

d. Work done by your M.L.A.

1

2

3

8

e.

e . On political parties

1

2

3

8

f.

f. Work done by your Panchayat/Municipality

1

2

3

8

c. d.

Q3.

a.

Have you heard/read about the following political events that occurred during the past one year? Q3a Yes No Don’t (If Yes) Yes No Don’t N.A. (If yes) Did you ever have discussions about them? Rem.

b.

Rem.

c.

a. Protest demonstrations by the youth in Kashmir

1

2

8

(If Yes)

1

2

8

9

b. Allahabad High Court verdict on the Ayodhya issue

1

2

8

(If Yes)

1

2

8

9

d.

c. Bihar Assembly elections

1

2

8

(If Yes)

1

2

8

9

d. Naxal violence

1

2

8

(If Yes)

1

2

8

9

e. Corruption in the Commonwealth Games held in Delhi 1

2

8

(If Yes) 1

2

8

9

f. 2G Spectrum/Telecom scam

2

8

(If Yes) 1

2

8

9

e. f. Q4.

(If Yes in Q3a)With whom did you discuss these issues the most – with friends, with family members, with neighbours, with colleagues at work or with any person? (Please insist on one answer ) 1. With friends 5. With any person

Q5.

1

2. With family 8. No Opinion

3. With Neighbour

4. With Colleagues

9. N.A.

Now I am going to read out two statements on issues related to electoral reform. Please tell me whether you agree more with statement 1 or statement 2. a. (1) People should be given the right to recall (2) Even if the people are unhappy with the

a.

their MP/MLA, if they are not satisfied with their performance of their MP/MLA, they should still be allowed to work for the full five-year term. performance. 1. Agree with one (1) 2. Agree with two (2) 8. No Opinion b. (1) Those above the age of 65 should be barred (2) In a democracy it will be unfair to debar people from contesting elections. from contesting elections on the basis of their age. 1. Agree with one (1) 2. Agree with two (2) 8. No Opinion c. (1) Voting should be made compulsory for all (2) In a democracy, people should be free to eligible voters, in order to strengthen democracy. vote or not to vote. 1. Agree with one (1) 2. Agree with two (2) 8. No Opinion d. (1) Seats should be reserved for youth in the (2) Instead of asking for reservation, youth should enter the Lok Sabha and the Vidhan Sabha Lok Sabha and the Vidhan Sabha. on their own steam like the rest. 1. Agree with one (1) 2. Agree with two (2) 8. No Opinion

b.

c. d.

Q6.

If you take into account who you voted for in the last few elections, then of which political party would you consider yourself to be a supporter? (Record the party name and consult the code book for coding)______________________________ 99. NA

Appendix I

Q7.

135

Did you vote in the 2009 Lok Sabha election? 1. Yes

2. No

3. Don’t Remember

8. No Opinion

Q7a. (If Yes in Q7) Which party did you vote for in the 2009 Lok Sabha election? (Supply WHITE dummy ballot and explain procedure)(Record the party name and consult the code book for coding)________________________________________________ 99. NA Q8. (If Yes in Q7) People have different considerations while deciding whom to vote for. What mattered to you more while deciding whom to vote for in the 2009 Lok Sabha election - party or candidate? 1. Party

2. Candidate (Go to Q8b)

8. Can’t say

9. N.A.

Q8a. (If ‘Party’ in Q8) What was the most important consideration in favour of the party? (Don’t Read Answer Categories) 0. The party had fielded a young candidate 1. People of my caste/community supported that party. 2. The group or the faction in the village/mohalla supported the party. 3. My family members are traditional supporters/voters of the party. 4. I/members of my family have benefitted, or expect to benefit from the party. 5. The party has good leadership. 6. The overall programme of the party is good. 7. Other (Specify)________________________________

Q8b.

a.

Q9.

b. c. d.

8. Can’t say

9. N.A.

(If ‘Candidate’ in Q8) What was the most important consideration in favour of the candidate?(Don’t Read Answer Categories) 0. The candidate was young 1. People of my caste/community supported that candidate. 2. The group or the faction in the village/mohalla supported the candidate. 3. We have family ties or good relations with the candidate. 4. I/members of my family have benefitted, or expect to benefit from the candidate. 6. The candidate is accessible. 5. I am impressed by the candidate’s personality. 7. Other (Specify)________________________________ 8. Can’t say 9. N.A. Did you participate in these election-related activities? Yes No Don’t No Activities rem. opinion a.Collecting funds for the candidate 1 2 3 8 b.Attending election meetings/rallies 1 2 3 8 c.Taking part in the election campaign/distributing pamphlets 1 2 3 8 d.Watching election-related programs on TV 1 2 3 8

Q10. Did you vote in the last Assembly elections held in your State? 1. Yes

Q11.

1. Yes

a.

2. No

d.

8. No Opinion

2. No

3. Don’t Remember

8. No Opinion

Q12. What matters to you most while voting for a candidate – candidate’s experience, candidate’s party, candidate’s work or candidate’s young age? Rank from 1 to 4 in order of preference.

b. c.

3. Don’t Remember

Did you vote in the last Panchayat/Municipal elections held in your area?

Rank

a.Candidate’s experience b.Candidate’s party c.Candidate’s work d.Candidate’s young age

_____ _____ _____ _____

Q13. Other than elections, have you taken part in any protest/demonstration related to a social or political issue in the last two years? 1. Yes 2. No 8. Don’t remember Q14. Are you/ have you ever been a member of any political party? 1. Yes 2. No 8. No Answer Q15. Are you/have you ever been a member of the student wing/youth wing of a political party? 1. Yes

2. No

8. No Answer

Q16. Are you/have you been a member of any union at your workplace? 1. Yes

2. No

8. No Answer

136 Indian Youth and Electoral Politics Q17.

Are you/have you ever been a member of any social service organization or NGO? 1. Yes

2. No

8. No Answer

Q18. Apart from this are you/have you ever been a member of any other organisation?

* Q18a.

1. Yes

2. No

8. No Answer

(If Yes) Which organization are you/have you been a part of?............................(Record exact answer) Q19. Who is the MP from your constituency?(Consult Codebook).............. 1. Aware 2. Not aware Q19a. (If Aware) Does the MP from your constituency belong to any political family?(Consult Codebook) 1. Aware

2. Not aware

9. NA

Q20. Are you satisfied with the performance of the MP who represents your constituency?(Probe further whether 'fully' or 'somewhat' satisfied or dissatisfied) 1. Fully satisfied 4. Fully dissatisfied

Q21.

2. Somewhat satisfied 3. Somewhat dissatisfied 8. Can't Say/D.K. Who is the MLA from your constituency?(Not to be asked in constituencies Nemmara, Thoothukudi, Mungra Badshahpur and Bishnupur)

...........................1.

Aware

2. Not aware

Q21a. (If Aware) Does the MLA from your constituency belong to any political family? 1. Aware

2. Not aware

9. NA

Q22. Are you satisfied with the performance of the MLA who represents your constituency? (Probe further whether 'fully' or 'somewhat' satisfied or dissatisfied) 1. Fully satisfied 4. Fully dissatisfied

2. Somewhat satisfied 8. Can't Say/D.K.

3. Somewhat dissatisfied

Q23. Is the Sarpanch/Corporator from your area under the age of 40? 1. Yes

a.

b.

2. No

8. D.K.

Q24. Now I am going to read out two statements to you. Please tell me whether you agree more with statement 1 or statement 2. a. (1) Young leaders are able to perform better (2) Young leaders may have the zeal but since because of their enthusiasm and fresh thinking. they lack experience, they are not able to perform effectively. 1. Agree with one (1) 2. Agree with two (2) 8. No Opinion b. (1) Young leaders are better educated and (2) Young leaders might be better educated but therefore are more capable to solve problems. since they are not in touch with ground realities, they are unable to solve problems. 1. Agree with one (1) 2. Agree with two (2) 8. No Opinion

Q25. Now I will read out a few statements. Please tell me whether you agree or disagree with each one of them? (Probe further if 'strongly' or 'somewhat'agree or disagree) Agree Strongly Somewhat

a. b. c. d. e.

a. The country’s youth stand divided on the basis of religion and caste. 1 b. For better development, young leaders should be given the charge of governing the country 1 c. On political issues, young and old leaders 1 think alike. There is no difference. d. Voters should get the option of rejecting all candidates while voting if they don’t like any of them. 1 e. Young leaders are seen more on TV and in newspapers and therefore unable to pay attention to the problems of their constituencies. 1

Disagree Somewhat Strongly

No Opinion

2

3

4

8

2

3

4

8

2

3

4

8

2

3

4

8

2

3

4

8

Appendix I

a.

137

Q26. Now I will ask you to compare young leaders (40 years and under) and old leaders (60 years and over). Please tell me who is better at performing these duties? Young Old No difference Leader Leader

b. a. Visiting the constituency regularly b. Keeping in touch with the voters c. Keeping in touch with party workers d. Development of the constituency e. Working honestly

c. d. e.

1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3

Can’t say/No Opinion

8 8 8 8 8

Q27. Suppose there are two candidates fighting from your Lok Sabha constituency. One is 60 years old and the other is 35 years old. Both are fighting an election for the first time and both are promising development. In such a situation, who would you vote for, the first candidate or the second candidate? 1. First Candidate

Q28. Q29.

2. Second Candidate

8. No Answer

It is normally seen that members of one family win election after election from the same constituency? 1. Yes 2. No 8. D.K. Are you aware of this fact? Now I will read out two statements to you. Please tell me whether you agree more with statement 1 or statement 2? a. (1) Just as there is nothing wrong with doctors’ (2) Doctors’ children may become doctors and children becoming doctors and actors’ children actors’ children may become actors’ but it is becoming actors, similarly there is nothing wrong not right for political parties to follow the same with political parties giving tickets to children of example and give tickets to children of political political leaders. leaders. 1. Agree with one (1) 2. Agree with two (2) 8. No Opinion b. (1) Compared to others, it becomes easier to get (2) Political parties give tickets to only those, a ticket to fight elections if one hails from a who they think, can win an election. If someone political family. Winnability is not the prime from a political family gets a ticket, then it should consideration when a political party gives tickets. be seen as mere coincidence. 1. Agree with one (1) 2. Agree with two (2) 8. No Opinion

a.

b.

Q30. Suppose there are two candidates contesting elections from your Lok Sabha constituency. One candidate is 50 years old and is the sitting MP from the constituency. The other candidate is 28 years old and his father had been MP from the constituency several times. In such a situation, who will you vote for, the first candidate or the second candidate? 1. First Candidate

Q31. a.

2. Second Candidate

8. No Answer

Now I will read out two statements about Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. Please tell me which statement do you agree with more – the first or the second? a. (1) Rahul Gandhi is genuinely a very popular (2) Rahul Gandhi’s popularity has been created leader by the media 1. Agree with one (1) 2. Agree with two (2) 8. No Opinion (2) Rahul Gandhi is promoting only those young b. (1) Rahul Gandhi is giving a fair and equal leaders who belong to a political family. opportunity to all youth to come into politics.

b.

1. Agree with one (1)

2. Agree with two (2)

8. No Opinion

c. (1) Rahul Gandhi’s visits to villages and slums (2) Rahul Gandhi’s visits to villages and slums

c.

is an honest attempt by him to understand is nothing but the politics of votebank. the problems of the people. 1. Agree with one (1) 2. Agree with two (2) 8. No Opinion d. (1) Looking at the present situation, the (2) Since Rahul Gandhi lacks experience in politics and governance, it would not be right country needs Rahul Gandhi as prime to make him prime minister now. minister. 1. Agree with one (1) 2. Agree with two (2) 8. No Opinion

d.

Q32.

Apart from Rahul Gandhi, is there any other youth leader who inspires you? 1. Yes

2. No

3. Not even Rahul Gandhi

8. Can’t say

138 Indian Youth and Electoral Politics Q32a. (If Yes) Name the youth leader who inspires you?(If mentions more than one name ask for the most important name)___________________________________99. NA Q33. Given an opportunity, will you make politics your career? 1. Yes 2. No 8. Can’t say Q33a. (If No) People have different reasons for not making politics their career. Some people are interested in politics but disillusioned with political leaders, some are interested in politics but don’t have political connections or resources, and some have no interest at all in politics. What is the main reason for you for not making politics a career? 1. No interest

2. Instrested but disillusioned with politics

3. Interested but don’t have connection or resourses 4. Other Specify__________________

8. No opinion

9. N.A.

Q34. In your opinion, which current leader focuses most on the problems of the youth? (NAME)________________________________________ 99. N.A.

Q35. In your opinion, can young leaders govern the country better than other leaders? 1. Yes

2. No

8. No Opinion

Q36. Do you think your vote has an effect on how the country should be run? 1. Has no effect

2. Has effect

8. DK/Can’t say

Q36a. (if Has effect)What kind of effect do you think your vote has? ---------------------------------------------

*

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(Record exact answer and

later translate to English using the translation performa)

Q37. How often do you read the newspaper – daily, once in two days, 2-4 times in a week, 5-6 times in a week or never? 1. Daily 2. Once in 1-2 days 3. 2-4 times in a week 4. 5-6 times in a week

5. Never

Q38. How often do you listen to news on the radio – More than once a day, once a day, once in two days, 2-4 times in a week, 5-6 times in a week or never? 1. More than once a day

2. Once a day

3. Once in 1-2 days

4. 2-4 times in a week

5. 5-6 times in a week

6. Never

Q39. How often do you watch the news on television – More than once a day, once a day, once in two days, 2-4 times in a week, 5-6 times in a week or never? 1. More than once a day

2. Once a day

3. Once in 1-2 days

4. 2-4 times in a week

5. 5-6 times in a week

6. Never

Q40. How often do you use the internet – daily, at least 3-4 times in a week, at least once a week, sometimes or never? 1. Daily/almost everyday

2. At least 3-4 times in a week

3. At least once a week

4. Sometimes

5.Never

9. NA

Q41. For what work do you use the internet most? 1. E-Mailing

2. Chatting/Social Networking

4. Gaming

5. Online Transactions

6. Any other (Specify)_____________________ 8. No Opinion

3. For Information/Education 9. N.A.

Appendix I

139

BACKGROUND DATA Personal Information Z1.

What is your age?

Z2.

Gender:

Z3.

What is your marital status?

(In completed years) ___________ (Recode 95 for age 95 years and above) 1. Male

2. Female

1. Married (If both husband and wife live together) 2. Married, gauna not performed (Married but not started living together) 3. Widowed 4. Divorced 5. Separated 6. Deserted 7. Never married

Z4. F

M

Up to what level have you studied__________________ (Record exactly and consult code book)

Z4a. (If R studied and is less than 25 years of age) Are you still continuing your studies? 2. Yes 1. No 9. NA Z5b. Up to what level have your father and your mother studied? Father:__________________________ Mother:______________________________

Z5.

What is your main occupation? _____________________________________ (Record exactly and consult code book & if retired, try to ascertain his/her previous occupation)

Z5a. (If Housewife) Aside from your housework, do you do anything that contributes to the family income? 2. Yes

Z5b.

1. No

9. NA

What is/has been the main occupation of your father? ___________________________ (Record exactly and consult code book & if retired, try to ascertain his/her previous occupation)

Z6.

What is your Caste/Jati-biradari/Tribe name? ______________________________(Consult state

Z6a.

And what is your caste group? (Double check and consult SC/ST/OBC list for the state)

code book, or master list)

Z7.

Z8.

1. Scheduled Caste (SC)

2. Scheduled Tribe (ST)

3. Other Backward Classes (OBC)

4. Other

What is your religion? 1. Hindu

2. Muslim

3. Christian

4. Sikh

6. Jain

7. Animism

8. No religion

9. Others (Specify) ________

5. Buddhist/Neo Buddhist

Generally, which language is spoken in your house? _________________________ (Consult code book for coding)

Z9.

Z10.

Do you have a Voter identity card? 1. Yes I have

2. Photographed, but did not get it

4. Do not have

5. Had, but lost it

6. Jain

7. Animism

3. Have, but it has mistakes 7. Any other (Specify)_______

8. No religion

9. Others (Specify) ________

Do you have a Ration card? 1. Above Poverty Line 4. Annapurna

2. Below Poverty Line 5. Do not have

3. Antyodaya 6. Had, but lost it

7. Any other (Specify)_______

Note: Hereafter any reference to household would mean ‘normal household’ defined as a house where family members and relatives live. If R refers to an ‘institutional household’, for example old age homes, hostels, religious institutions, etc, ask about household back home.

140 Indian Youth and Electoral Politics Z11.

Area/Locality: 1. Village 3. City (Above 1 lakh)

A

C

2. Town (Below 1 lakh) 4. Metropolitan City (Above 10 lakh)

(If in doubt consult the electoral roll. If not stated on electoral roll, then classify as village)

Z12.

Total number of family members living in the household: Adults:____ Children: :____ (If more than 9, Code 9)

Z13.

Total number of rooms in the house: _________ (Count kitchen as a room but do not include bathroom/toilet/passage/verandah or any structure meant for storage of grains or keeping animals. If more than 9, code 9)

Z14.

Type of house where R lives? (own or rented) 1. Hut/ jhuggi jhopri (if wall materials used are plastic/polythene/mud /grass/leaves/stones/unburnt brick and there is either no roof or it is made up of same materials used for walls) 2. Kutcha house (If wall materials include wood/bamboo/mud and roof is thatched/wooden/tin/asbestos sheets etc.) 3. Kutcha-pucca (If walls are made up of pucca materials such as burnt brick but roof is not concrete/cemented) 4. Mixed houses (If some rooms are pucca and other rooms are kutcha-pucca or kutcha) 5. Pucca independent house (Both walls and roofs are made up of pucca materials and built on separate plot) 6. Flats (If more than one house shares the same plot and the building is at least double storied)

Z15.

Household Information Total agricultural land (including orchard and plantation) under cultivation (in last 12 months): _________ (Ask in local units, but record in standard acres. If more than 99, Code 99)

Z16.

Yes

No

a.

Do you or members of your household have the following: a. Bicycle

1

0

b.

b. LPG

1

0

c.

c. Mobile/Telephones

1

0

d.

d. Electric fan/cooler

1

0

e.

e . T.V.

1

0

f.

f. Pumping Set ¼Ask the Q.only rural respondent½

1

0

g.

g. Scooters/motorcycles/mopeds

1

0

h.

h. Cars/jeeps/vans

1

0

i.

i. Tractor

1

0

j.

j. Fridge

1

0

_____

0

k.

k. Total No. of Livestock: ¼Ask the Q.only rural respondent½

Z17.

Total monthly household income - putting together the income of all members of the household? (Rs.)_____________________

Appendix II Who Were Interviewed during the Survey: The Social Profile

Gender Male Youth

% n

Senior

% n

All

% n

56.7 869 54.2 560 55.7 1,429

Female 43.3 663 45.8 473 44.3 1,136

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033 100 2,565

n

%

n

%

n

%

2,054

79.0

958

93.1

1,096

72.1

Married

54

2.0

7

0.7

47

3.1

Married, Gauna Not Performed

66

2.5

49

4.7

17

1.1

Widowed

All

Senior

Youth

n

464

18.1

289

n

%

28

175

11.4

Nonliterate

%

n

%

Level of Education

632

24.6

306

29.6

326

21.3

Primary

344

13.4

123

11.9

221

14.4

2

37

762

29.7

234

22.6

528

34.5

1.4

2

0.2

35

2.3

Separated

High School

2.0

0

–

2

0.1

Divorced

Middle School

Note: There was no information available for 15 respondents.

All

Senior

Youth

Marital Status

355

13.8

75

7.3

280

18.3

College

29

1.1

2

0.2

27

1.7

Deserted

8

0.4

6

0.6

2

0.1

N.A.

308

12.0

11

1

297

19.5

Never Married

2,565

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

2,550

100

1,029

100

1,521

100

Total

n

%

n

%

n

%

40.9

1,214

47.3

587

56.8

627

All

Senior

Youth

N

%

N

%

N

%

1,645

64.1

745

72.0

900

58.7

Nonliterate

Level of Education of Mother

All

Senior

Youth

Nonliterate

Level of Education of Father

427

16.6

136

13.2

291

19

Primary

511

19.9

192

18.6

319

20.8

Primary

142

5.5

45

4.4

97

6.3

Middle School

170

6.6

43

4.2

127

8.3

Middle School

198

7.7

43

4.2

155

10.1

High School

434

16.9

123

11.9

311

20.3

High School

33

1.4

7

0.7

26

1.8

College

130

5.1

35

3.4

95

6.2

College

120

4.7

57

5.5

63

4.1

N.A.

106

4.1

53

5.1

53

3.5

N.A.

2,565

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

2,565

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

n

All

Senior

Youth

0.8

9

n

22

0.9

n

%

0.9

13

%

n

%

Higher Professional

32

1.2

10

n

%

1

22

1.4

%

n

%

Higher Professional

Father’s Occupation

All

Senior

Youth

Occupation

139

5.4

46

4.5

93

6.1

Lower Professional

135

5.3

61

5.9

74

4.8

Lower Professional

257

10

75

7.3

182

11.9

Business

241

9.4

96

9.3

145

9.5

Business

516

20.1

190

18.4

326

21.3

Skilled or Unskilled Worker

434

16.9

167

16.2

267

17.4

Skilled or Unskilled Worker

1,442

56.2

610

59.0

832

54.3

Agriculture

697

27.2

331

32

366

23.9

Agriculture

35

1.4

16

1.5

19

1.2

Non-worker

966

37.7

337

32.6

629

41.1

Non-worker

154

6

87

8.4

67

4.4

N.A.

60

2.3

31

3

29

1.9

N.A.

2,565

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

2,565

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

n

%

All

Senior

Youth

24.5

n

%

602

23.5

22

226

n

376

%

n

%

Scheduled Caste

586

22.8

24

248

n

338

22.1

Hindu Upper Caste

%

n

%

Caste Group

All

Senior

Youth

Caste Community

5.1

136

5.3

58

5.4

78

133

5.2

56

5.4

77

5

Hindu ST

1,066

41.5

430

41.6

636

41.4

Other Backward Classes

566

22.1

217

21

349

22.8

Hindu SC

Schedules Tribe

975

38

389

37.7

586

38.2

Hindu OBC

206

8

82

7.9

124

8.1

761

29.7

319

31

442

29

Others

Muslim

99

3.9

41

4

58

3.8

Others

2,565

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

2,565

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

n

%

n

%

n

%

All

Senior

Youth

n

%

n

%

2,376

92.6

967

93.5

92

1,409

n

Yes

2,264

88.3

911

88.2

1,353

88.2

Hindu

%

Voter ID Card

All

Senior

Youth

Religion

63

2.5

25

2.4

38

2.5

Christian

63

2.5

11

1.1

52

3.3

Photographed but Didn’t Get It

206

8

82

7.9

124

8.1

Muslim

26

1

10

1

16

1

Yes, But Has Mistakes

11

0.4

6

0.6

5

0.3

Sikh

73

2.8

26

2.5

47

3.1

No

7

0.3

3

0.3

4

0.3

Buddhist

22

0.9

15

1.5

7

0.5

1

0

0

0

1

0.1

3

0.1

2

0.2

1

0.1

Others

5

0.2

4

0.4

1

0.1

No Info/Others

No Religion

Had, but Lost

10

0.4

4

0.4

6

0.4

Jain

2,565

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

2,565

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

n

%

n

%

n

%

All

Senior

Youth

n

%

n

%

n

%

Area/Locality

All

Senior

Youth

Ration Card

1,890

73.7

767

74.2

1,123

73.3

Village

966

37.7

379

36.7

587

38.3

APL

1,114

43.5

473

45.8

641

41.8

BPL

377

14.7

162

15.7

215

14

Town

52

2

19

1.8

33

2.2

Antyodaya

7

City

185

7.2

78

7.6

107

21

0.8

5

0.5

16

1

Annapurna

No

250

9.7

85

8.2

165

10.8

113

4.4

26

2.5

87

5.7

139

5.4

57

5.5

82

5.4

N.A./Others

Metropolitan City

23

0.9

15

1.5

8

0.5

Lost

2,565

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

2,565

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

n

%

n

%

n

%

22.5

613

23.9

268

25.8

345

1,004

39.2

380

36.8

624

40.7

3–4

All

Senior

Youth

45.5

n

%

1,140

44.1

42

434

n

696

%

n

%

1–2

826

32.2

348

33.7

478

31.2

3–4

Number of Family Members (Children)

All

Senior

Youth

1–2

Number of Family Members (Adults)

152

5.9

71

8.9

81

5.3

5–6

616

24

260

25.2

356

23.3

5–6

47

1.8

23

2.3

24

1.5

7–8

210

8.1

84

8.2

126

8.2

7–8

32

1.3

16

1.5

16

1

9 and above

99

3.9

36

3.5

63

4.1

9 and above

378

14.7

141

13.6

237

15.5

Blank/N.A.

23

0.9

5

0.5

18

1.2

Blank/N.A.

2,565

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

2,565

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

n

%

n

%

n

%

All

Senior

Youth

n

%

n

%

n

%

Type of House

All

Senior

Youth

156

6.1

67

6.5

89

5.8

Hut/ Jhuggi

1,433

55.9

504

48.8

929

60.6

1–2

563

21.9

228

22.1

335

21.9

Kutcha House

Total Number of Rooms in the House 3–4

530

20.7

224

21.7

306

20

Kucha Pukka

992

38.6

451

43.6

541

35.3

577

22.5

219

21.2

358

23.4

Mixed

10

0.4

8

0.8

2

0.2

5–6

685

26.9

278

26.8

411

26.8

Pucca (Ind)

34

1.3

9

0.9

25

1.6

Flat

130

5.1

70

6.8

60

3.9

8 and above

16

0.6

8

0.8

8

0.5

N.A.

2,565

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

2,565

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

n

%

n

%

n

%

All

Senior

Youth

n

%

n

%

n

%

Economic Class

All

Senior

Youth

270

10.5

118

11.4

152

9.9

Rich

327

12.7

146

14.1

181

11.8

Up to 1,000

Total Monthly Income

515

20.1

208

20.1

307

20

1,001– 2,000

658

25.7

255

24.7

403

26.3

Middle

451

17.6

179

17.3

272

17.8

2,001– 3,000

1,129

44

435

42.1

694

45.3

Lower

324

12.6

132

12.8

192

12.5

3,001– 4,000

302

11.8

115

11.1

187

12.2

4,001– 5,000

370

14.4

150

14.5

220

14.4

Poor

413

16.1

157

15.2

256

16.7

5,001– 10,000

138

5.4

75

7.3

63

4.1

Very Poor

161

6.3

65

6.4

96

6.3

10,001– 20,000

72

2.8

31

3

41

2.7

Above 20,000

2,565

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

2,565

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

Appendix III Opinion and Attitudes: The Basic Findings

Interest in Politics and Political News Great Deal Youth

% n

Senior

% n

9.8 150 6.9 71

Some Interest 52.4 803 44.1 456

No Interest No Opinion 33.9 519 41.9 432

3.9 60 7.1 73

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

Senior

Youth

Senior

Youth

Senior

Member of Parliament Youth

State Government

Central Government

n

%

n

%

119

11.5

192

12.5

13 134

n

242

15.8

107

10.4

181

11.8

Always

%

n

%

n

%

n

%

Discussions on the Work Being Done by Political Institutions

341

33

616

40.2

350

33.9

619

40.4

315

30.5

580

37.9

Sometimes

430

41.6

610

39.8

433

41.9

576

37.6

482

46.7

670

43.7

Never

143

13.8

114

7.4

116

11.2

95

6.2

129

12.5

101

6.6

No Opinion

1,033

100

1,532

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

Panchayat/ Municipality

Political Parties

Senior

Youth

Senior

Youth

Senior

Member of Legislative Youth Assembly

n

%

n

%

n

%

n

%

n

%

n

%

18.3

293

28.4

477

31.1

164

15.9

289

18.9

136

13.2

281

40

382

37

655

42.8

333

32.2

587

38.3

365

35.3

613

34.3

251

24.3

321

21

404

39.1

544

35.5

390

37.8

526

7.3

107

10.4

79

5.2

132

12.8

112

7.3

142

13.7

112

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

1,033

100

1,532

154 Indian Youth and Electoral Politics Awareness about Protest Demonstrations by the Youth in Kashmir

Youth

% n

Senior

% n

Yes

No

Don’t Remember

31.7

64

4.2

486 23.7 245

981 72 744

65 4.3 44

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

(If aware) Participation in Discussions on Protest Demonstrations by the Youth in Kashmir Yes Youth

% n

Senior

% n

64.4 313 59.2 145

No 31.3 152 35.9 88

Don’t Remember

Total

4.3

100

21 4.9 12

486 100 245

Note: Data calculated only for valid respondents as the question is dependent. Awareness about Allahabad High Court Verdict on the Ayodhya Issue Yes Youth

% n

Senior

% n

57.6 882 45.8 473

No 39.6 606 50.5 522

Don’t Remember 2.9 44 3.7 38

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

(If aware) Participation in Discussions on Allahabad High Court Verdict on the Ayodhya Issue Yes

No

Don’t Remember

Total

67.2

28.8

4

100

Youth

% n

593

Senior

%

63

n

298

254 31.5 149

35 5.5 26

882 100 473

Note: Data calculated only for valid respondents as the question is dependent.

Appendix III

155

Awareness about Bihar Assembly Elections 2010

Youth Senior

Yes

No

%

29

66.3

n

444

% n

1,016

22.7

71.7

234

741

Don’t Remember 4.7 72 5.6 58

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

(If aware) Participation in Discussions about Bihar Assembly Elections

Youth

%

Senior

%

n n

Yes

No

Don’t Remember

Total

62.8

32.9

4.3

100

279

146

61.1

33.3

143

78

119 5.6 13

444 100 234

Note: Data calculated only for valid respondents as the question is dependent. Awareness about Naxal Violence Yes Youth

% n

Senior

% n

44.1 676 33.3 344

No 51.4 788 62.3 644

Don’t Remember 4.4 68 4.4 45

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

(If aware) Participation in Discussions on Naxal Violence

Youth

%

Senior

%

n n

Yes

No

62.6

31.8

423 60.2 207

215 34 117

Don’t Remember 5.6 38 5.8 20

Total 100 676 100 344

Note: Data calculated only for valid respondents as the question is dependent.

156 Indian Youth and Electoral Politics Awareness about Corruption in Commonwealth Games Held in Delhi

Youth

% n

Senior

% n

Yes

No

Don’t Remember

44.2

52.2

3.7

677 31.5 325

799

56

64.4

4.2

665

43

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

(If aware) Participation in Discussions on Corruption in Commonwealth Games Held in Delhi Yes Youth Senior

%

70

n

474

%

68

n

221

No

Don’t Remember

25.3

4.7

177

32

26.8

5.2

87

17

Total 100 677 100 325

Note: Data calculated only for valid respondents as the question is dependent. Awareness about 2G Spectrum/Telecom Scam Yes Youth Senior

%

42.5

n

651

%

31

n

320

No 54.1 829 65.2 673

Don’t Remember 3.4 52 3.9 40

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

(If aware) Participation in Discussions on 2G Spectrum/Telecom Scam Yes Youth

% n

Senior

% n

76.2 496 68.8 220

No 20.1 131 27.8 89

Don’t Remember 3.7 24 3.4 11

Total 100 651 100 320

Note: Data calculated only for valid respondents as the question is dependent.

n

%

n

%

100

40.8

284

58.4

49

20

88

18.1

With Family

28

11.4

22

4.5

With Neighbor

15

6.1

13

2.7

With Colleagues

Note: Data calculated only for valid respondents as the question is dependent.

Senior

Youth

With Friends

Discussions on Political Issues

17

6.9

16

3.3

With Any Person

36

14.7

63

13

No Opinion

245

100

486

100

Total

158 Indian Youth and Electoral Politics Opinion on Issues Related to Electoral Reform

Right to Recall MP/MLA

Youth

% n

Senior

% n

Age Limit of 65 Youth on Contesting Elections Senior

% n % n

Compulsory Voting

Youth

%

Senior

%

n n

Reservation for Youth in Elections

Youth

% n

Senior

% n

Agree

Disagree

No Opinion

68.5

15.9

15.6

1,049 57.1 590 49.3 755 41.8 432 59.6 913 51.5 532 41.6 637 31.8 328

244 18 186 35.1 537 36 372 25.7 394 25.6 264 32.5 498 34.3 354

239 24.9 257 15.7 240 22.2 229 14.7 225 22.9 237 25.9 397

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033 100 1,532 100 1,033 100 1,532 100 1,033 100 1,532

34

100

351

1,033

23.5

27

199

n

260

%

n

%

126

17.1

218

19.7

BJP

56

7.6

76

6.9

Left

78

10.6

92

8.3

BSP

67

9.1

74

6.7

SP

29

3.9

95

8.6

AIADMK

Senior

Youth

n

%

n

%

943

91.3

1,288

84.1

Yes

47

4.5

192

12.5

No

Participation in Voting in 2009 Lok Sabha Election

29

2.8

39

2.5

Don’t Remember

Note: Data calculated only for valid respondents as some respondents did not reply.

Senior

Youth

INC

Supporter of Political Party

14

1.4

13

0.8

No Opinion

174

23.7

284

25.7

Other Parties

7

1

7

.6

100

Total

100 1,033

736

100

1,106

100

Total

1,532

Don’t Know

n

%

n

%

212

22.5

259

20.1

136

14.4

207

16.1

BJP

59

6.2

73

5.7

Left

92

9.8

92

7.1

BSP

77

8.2

88

6.8

SP

n

%

n

%

62.3

567

60.1

802 237

25.1

334

25.9

Candidate

Note: Data calculated only for valid respondents as the question is dependent.

Senior

Youth

Party

Voting Consideration in 2009 Lok Sabha Election: Party or Candidate

Note: Data calculated only for valid respondents as the question is dependent.

Senior

Youth

INC

Voted for Political Party in 2009 Lok Sabha Election

139

14.7

152

11.8

Can’t say

50

5.3

79

6.1

JD (U)

137

14.5

249

19.4

Other parties

180

100

Total

943

100

1,288

19.1

241

18.7

Don’t Know

943

100

1,288

100

Total

n

10

1.8

16

n

%

2

%

59

10.4

89

11.5

41

7.2

47

5.9

Supported Supported by My by Village Community or Mohalla

150

26.5

238

29.7

Supported by Family

76

13.4

101

12.6

Family Benefited from Party

n

10

4.2

41

n

%

12.3

%

21

8.9

34

10.2

17

7.2

22

6.6

32

13.5

32

9.6

Good Relations with the Candidate

33

13.9

52

15.6

Family Benefited from Candidate

Note: Data calculated only for valid respondents as the question is dependent.

Senior

Youth

Young Candidate

Supported Supported by My by Village Community or Mohalla

Most Important Consideration in Favor of the Candidate

Note: Data calculated only for valid respondents as the question is dependent.

Senior

Youth

Young Candidate

Most Important Consideration in Favor of a Party

74

31.2

112

33.5

23

9.7

13

3.9

Accessible

89

119

Candidate’s Personality

15.7

123

15.3

21

166

20.7

27

11.4

28

8.4

Can’t Say/ Others

23

4.1

22

2.7

Party Good Program Is Can’t Say/ leadership Good Others

237

100

334

100

Total

567

100

802

100

Total

162 Indian Youth and Electoral Politics Participation in Election-related Activities Yes Collection of Youth Funds for the Candidate Senior

Don’t Remember

No

%

5

88.4

n

77

1,354

%

4.5

87

3.2

n

47

%

23

71.4

n

353

1,094

Senior

%

22

69.5

n

227

Election Youth Campaigns or Distributing Senior Pamphlets

% n % n

Watched Electionrelated Program on TV

Youth

% n

Senior

% n

20.6 316 17.1 177 45.9 703 38.3 396

2.6 40

Youth

Attend Election Meetings or Rallies

No Opinion

899

3.3

34

51

3.6

4.9

37

74.3

51

1.9

1,138

3.2

29

74.7

49

3.2

772

4.9

33

49.2

51

1.8

754

3.1

28

54.8

47

2.8

566

100 1,532

54

2.2

718

4 61 5.2

33

4.1

29

Total

42

100 1,033 100 1,532 100 1,033 100 1,532 100 1,033 100 1,532 100 1,033

Participation in Voting in Last State Assembly Elections Yes Youth

% n

Senior

% n

79.5 1,218 88.1 910

No 16.8 257 7.3 75

Don’t Remember 2.7 42 2.9 30

No Opinion

Total

1

100

15

1,532

1.7 18

100 1,033

Participation in Voting in Last Panchayat/Municipal Elections

Youth

%

Senior

%

n n

Yes

No

Don’t Remember

81.6

14.6

2

1,250 91.4 944

223 5.5 57

31 1 10

No Opinion 1.8 28 2.1 22

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

Candidate’s Young Age

Candidate’s Work

Candidate’s Party

Candidate’s Experience

Senior

Youth

Senior

Youth

Senior

Youth

Senior

Youth

12.9

n

%

n

%

n

%

n

68

6.6

179

11.7

391

37.9

621

40.5

341

n

%

33

503

32.8

190

18.4

198

%

n

%

n

%

n

%

Rank 1

78

7.6

188

12.3

293

28.4

405

26.4

298

28.8

419

27.3

322

31.2

471

30.7

Rank 2

182

17.6

317

20.7

224

21.7

295

19.3

233

22.6

351

22.9

334

32.3

511

33.4

Rank 3

652

63.1

788

51.4

76

7.4

168

11

108

10.5

202

13.2

134

13

292

19.1

Rank 4

53

5.1

60

3.9

49

4.7

43

2.8

53

5.1

57

3.7

53

5.1

60

3.9

No Opinion

Most Important Consideration while Voting for a Candidate (Rank from 1 to 4 in Order of Preference)

1,033

100

1,532

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

164 Indian Youth and Electoral Politics Participation in Any Protest/Demonstration Related to a Social or Political Issue in the Last Two Years

Youth

%

Senior

%

n n

Yes

No

11.9

85.8

182 11.3 117

1,314 84.8 876

Don’t Remember 2.3 36 3.9 40

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

Currently/Previously Membership of Political Party Yes Youth

%

Senior

%

n n

8.7 133 7.6 78

No 86.2 1,321 86.4 893

No Answer 5.1

Total 100

78

1,532

6

100

62

1,033

Currently/Previously Membership of Youth Wing of a Political Party Yes Youth

% n

Senior

% n

9.8 150 5.6 58

No 85.7 1,313 88.2 911

No Answer 4.5 69 6.2 64

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

Currently/Previously Membership of Union at Your Workplace Yes Youth

% n

Senior

% n

3.2 49 4.7 49

No 91.8 1,407 90.1 931

No Answer

Total

5

100

76

1,532

5.1 53

100 1,033

Appendix III

165

Currently/Previously Membership of Social Service Organization or NGO Yes Youth

% n

Senior

% n

2.4 37 2.3 24

No

No Answer

92.7

Total

4.9

1,420

100

75

89.3

1,532

8.4

922

100

87

1,033

Currently/Previously Membership of Any Other Organization Yes Youth

%

Senior

%

n n

2.7 42 1.7 18

No

No Answer

91.2

Total

6.1

1,397

100

93

88.9

1,532

9.4

918

100

97

1,033

Awareness about Sitting MP from Their Constituency

Youth

%

Senior

%

n n

Aware

Not Aware

58.2

41.8

891 50.6 523

641

Total 100 1,532

49.4 510

100 1,033

Awareness about Sitting MP Belonging to Any Political Family Aware Youth

% n

Senior

% n

42.6 380 41.3 216

Not Aware

Total

57.4

100

511 58.7 307

891 100 523

Note: Data calculated only for valid respondents as the question is dependent.

14.9

16

165

n

228

%

n

%

350

33.9

606

39.6

Somewhat Satisfied

n

%

n

%

63.7

566

54.8

976 467

45.2

556

36.3

Not Aware

Senior

Youth

38.9

39

221

n

380

%

n

%

Aware

345

61

596

61.1

Not Aware

566

100

976

100

Total

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

116

11.2

196

12.8

Somewhat Dissatisfied

Awareness about MLA’s Belonging to Any Political Family

Senior

Youth

Aware

Awareness about Sitting MLA from Their Constituency

Senior

Youth

Fully Satisfied

Satisfaction with Sitting MP’s Performance

165

16

230

15

Fully Dissatisfied

237

22.9

272

17.8

Can’t Say/ Don’t Know

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

n

184

17.8

245

n

%

16

%

341

33

626

40.9

Somewhat Satisfied

119

11.5

136

8.9

Somewhat Dissatisfied

Senior

Youth

n

%

n

%

428

41.4

671

43.8

Yes

409

39.6

632

41.3

No

196

19

229

14.9

Don’t Know

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

Awareness about Sarpanch/Corporator’s Age (Whether under 40)

Senior

Youth

Fully Satisfied

Satisfaction with Sitting MLA’s Performance

145

14

203

13.3

Fully Dissatisfied

244

23.6

322

21

Can’t Say/ Don’t Know

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

168 Indian Youth and Electoral Politics (1) Young leaders are able to perform better because of their enthusiasm and fresh thinking. (2) Young leaders may have the zeal but since they lack experience, they are not able to perform effectively.

Youth

%

Senior

%

n n

Agree with 1

Agree with 2

No Opinion

62.3

21.1

16.6

954 47.4 490

323 29.2 302

255 23.3 241

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

(1) Young leaders are better educated and therefore are more capable to solve problems. (2) Young leaders might be better educated but since they are not in touch with ground realities, they are unable to solve problems. Agree with 1 Youth

% n

Senior

% n

51.3 786 39.9 412

Agree with 2 30.4 466 35.4 366

No Opinion 18.3 280 24.7 255

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

Senior

Youth

Senior

Youth

Senior

Youth

Senior

Youth

Youth Young leaders ineffective because of involvement Senior with media

Right to reject

Politician’s political views unaffected by age

Youth should be given the charge of governing the country

Youth divided on caste and religion

Opinion on Political Issues

% n % n % n % n % n % n % n % n % n % n

29 444 25.4 262 39 597 31.2 322 15.7 241 14.4 149 44.4 680 36.9 381 26 399 21.9 226

Strongly Agree 24.3 373 21.2 219 26.2 401 23.7 245 23.2 356 19.9 206 15.8 242 15.7 162 19.3 296 18.5 191

Somewhat Agree 6.5 99 7.4 76 8.9 136 10.9 113 19.8 303 18.8 194 7.9 121 7.3 75 13.2 202 13.4 138

Somewhat Disagree 14.2 218 13.8 143 5.9 90 6.6 68 17.6 270 16.2 167 6.2 95 8.1 84 11.7 180 11.6 120

Strongly Disagree 26 398 32.2 333 20.1 308 27.6 285 23.6 362 30.7 317 25.7 394 32 331 29.7 455 34.7 358

No Opinion 100 1,532 100 1,033 100 1,532 100 1,033 100 1,532 100 1,033 100 1,532 100 1,033 100 1,532 100 1,033

Total

Working honestly

Development of the constituency

Keeping in touch with party workers

Keeping in touch with the voters

Visiting the constituency regularly

Senior

Youth

Senior

Youth

Senior

Youth

Senior

Youth

Senior

Youth

% n % n % n % n % n % n % n % n % n % n

48 735 36.3 375 43.7 669 30.1 311 38.6 592 28.8 298 40.2 616 24.3 251 39.3 602 23.3 241

Young Leader 18.7 287 22.3 230 22.1 336 27.8 287 22.9 351 26.5 294 14.8 226 22.7 234 13.8 211 23.3 241

Old Leader 22.7 348 27.5 284 23.3 357 27.4 283 23.8 365 26.4 293 26 398 28.1 290 29.8 456 33.6 347

No Difference 10.6 162 13.9 144 10.9 167 14.7 152 14.6 224 18.2 188 19.1 292 25 258 17.2 263 19.7 204

No Opinion 100 1,532 100 1,033 100 1,532 100 1,033 100 1,532 100 1,033 100 1,532 100 1,033 100 1,532 100 1,033

Total

Comparison between Performance of Young Leaders (40 years and under) and Old Leaders (60 years and over)

Appendix III

171

Voting Preference between an Aged (60-year-old) and a Young (35-year-old) Candidate if Both are Contesting for the First Time

Youth

%

Senior

%

n n

Aged First Time

Young First Time

No Answer

24.9

61.9

13.2

382 37.1 383

948 43.9 453

202 19.1 197

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

Awareness about Members of a Family Winning Election Time after Time from a Constituency

Youth

%

Senior

%

n n

Yes

No

38.3

4.5

587 35.3 365

621 38.1 394

Don’t Know 21.1 324 26.5 274

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

There Is Nothing Wrong in Giving Tickets to Children of Politicians to Contest Elections by Their Party Agree Youth

% n

Senior

% n

25.3 387 24.7 255

Disagree 53.3 816 47.7 495

No Opinion 21.5 329 27.4 283

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

Children of Politicians Get Tickets to Fight Election Easily

Youth

% n

Senior

% n

Agree

Disagree

No Opinion

28.6

44.3

27.2

438 26.9 278

678 40.2 415

416 32.9 340

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

172 Indian Youth and Electoral Politics Preference between 50-Year-Old Candidate Who Is the Sitting MP from the Constituency and 28-Year-Old Candidate Whose Father Had Been MP from the Constituency Several Times First Candidate Youth

% n

Senior

% n

30.4 466 39.4 407

Second Candidate 52.9 811 38.8 401

No opinion 16.6 255 21.8 255

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

Whether Rahul Gandhi Genuinely Popular or Hype Created by Media Genuinely Popular

Popularity Created by Media

No Opinion

23.9

25.1

Youth

%

51

n

781

Senior

% n

45.9 474

366 20.2 209

385 33.9 350

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

Whether Rahul Gandhi Gives Equal Opportunities to All or Promotes Youth from Political Families Gives Equal Chances

Favours Those from Political Families

No Opinion 34.1

Youth

%

36

30

n

551

459

Senior

% n

30.4 314

27.3 282

522 42.3 437

Total 100 1,532 100 1,033

Appendix III

173

Whether Rahul Gandhi’s Visit to Slums and Villages Is an Honest Attempt or for Vote-bank

Youth

%

Senior

%

n n

Genuine Concern

Popularity

No Opinion

36.9

32

31.1

566

490

31.1 321

100

476

29

Total 1,532

39.9

300

100

412

1,033

Rahul Gandhi Should Be the Next Prime Minister

Youth

%

Senior

%

n n

Agree

No, as He Is Inexperienced

No Opinion

27.6

37.8

34.6

423

579

23.4 242

100

430

34.4

1,532

42.1

356

Total

100

435

1,033

Any Other Inspirational Youth Leader apart from Rahul Gandhi Yes Youth

% n

Senior

% n

12.7 195 9.5 98

No 44.3 679 39.1 404

Not Even Rahul Gandhi 10.6 162 10.4 107

Can’t Say 32.4 496

Total 100 1,532

41

100

424

1,033

20

n

28

20.4

n

%

14.4

%

9

9.2

11

5.6

Akhilesh Yadav (SP)

1

1

9

4.6

Raj Thackeray (MNS)

1

1

14

7.2

Jagan Mohan Reddy

Senior

Youth

n

%

n

%

272

26.3

517

33.7

Yes

608

58.9

830

54.2

No

Interest in Making Politics Their Career

153

14.8

185

12.1

Can’t Say

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

32.7 32

1

54

27.7

Don’t Know

1

13

6.7

Sachin Pilot (INC)

Note: Data calculated only for valid respondents as the question is dependent.

Senior

Youth

Varun Gandhi (BJP)

Inspirational Youth Leaders

34

34.7

66

33.8

Others

98

100

195

100

Total

n

%

n

%

68.9

373

61.3

572 56

9.2

86

10.4

Disillusioned

53

8.7

69

8.3

No Connections/ Resources

Senior

Youth

n

69

6.7

n

%

8

122

%

Rahul Gandhi

20

1.9

41

2.7

Nitish Kumar

14

1.4

15

1

Shivraj Singh Chauhan

15

2.5

17

2

Others

16

1.5

28

1.8

19

1.8

31

2

Jayalalithaa Karunanidhi

Current Leader Who Focuses Most on the Problems of the Youth

Note: Data calculated only for valid respondents as the question is dependent.

Senior

Youth

No Interest

Reasons for Not Making Politics the Career

108

10.5

181

11.8

Others

72.7

N.A.

787

76.2

1,114

111

18.3

86

10.4

No Opinion

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

608

100

830

100

Total

176 Indian Youth and Electoral Politics Young Leaders Govern the Country Better Than Other Leaders

Youth

% n

Senior

No

No Opinion

62.1

18.2

19.7

951

% n

Yes

279

45.1

298

100

302

28.8

466

Total 1,532

26

100

269

1,033

Vote Efficacy No Effect

Has an Effect

Can’t Say

34.3

43

22.7

Youth

% n

526

Senior

%

31

n

320

658

100

348

39.9 412

Total 1,532

29.1

100

301

1,033

Frequency of Reading Newspapers

Daily Youth Senior

%

29

n

445

% n

22.8 236

Once in 1–2 Days 16.1 246 9.3 96

2–4 Times a Week 10.6 162 10.4 107

5–6 Times a Week 4.9 75 4.5 46

Never 39.4

Total 100

604

1,532

53

100

548

1,033

n

%

n

%

51

4.9

69

4.5

102

9.9

152

9.9

Once a Day

Senior

Youth

n

%

n

%

138

13.4

221

14.4

More Than Once a Day

174

16.8

336

21.9

Once a Day

Frequency of Following News on Television

Senior

Youth

More Than Once a Day

Frequency of Listening to News on Radio

91

8.8

167

10.9

Once in 1–2 Days

58

5.6

116

7.6

Once in 1–2 Days

115

11.1

221

14.4

2–4 Times a Week

79

7.6

115

7.5

2–4 Times a Week

78

7.6

154

10.1

5–6 Times a Week

54

5.2

81

5.3

5–6 Times a Week

437

42.3

433

28.3

Never

689

66.7

999

65.2

Never

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

1

10

n

n

%

3

46

%

Senior

Youth

n

%

n

%

13

1.3

67

4.4

Email

Primary Uses of the Internet

Senior

Youth

Daily/Almost Everyday

10

1

34

2..2

Social Networking

12

1.2

41

2.7

At Least 3-4 Times in A Week

Frequency of Surfing the Internet

19

1.8

120

7.8

Education

8

.8

40

2.6

At Least Once a Week

3

.3

18

1.2

Gaming

30

2.9

131

8.6

Sometimes

37

3.6

40

2.6

Others

593

57.4

831

54.2

Never

951

92

1,253

81.8

N.A./No Opinion

380

36.8

443

28.9

N.A.

Total

1,033

100

1,532

100

1,033

100

1,532

100

Total

About the Editor and Contributors Editor Sanjay Kumar is a Professor at the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), Delhi, and Codirector, Lokniti, a research program of the CSDS. Trained in survey research at the Summer School in the University of Michigan, he has directed various national and state-level surveys conducted by the CSDS, including the series of National Election Studies (NES) conducted during the Lok Sabha elections of 1996, 1998, 1999, 2004, and 2009. Besides the NES, he has also directed various state-level studies. His research draws heavily from empirical studies. He is also interested in mapping the changing patterns of democracy. He has been the country coordinator (India) for the State of Democracy in South Asia study conducted by the CSDS and a core team member of the Asian Barometer Study conducted in different countries. He has also been a member of the team of international observers for observing elections in various countries. He is also a member of the drafting committee for the charter on Free and Fair elections in Asia. His most recent book is Changing Electoral Politics in Delhi: From Caste to Class (SAGE Publications 2013). His other books are Measuring Voting Behaviour in India (with Praveen Rai; SAGE Publications 2013), Rise of the Plebeians? The Changing Face of Indian Legislative Assemblies (coedited with Christophe Jaffrelot 2009), and Indian Youth in a Transforming World: Attitudes and Perceptions (with Peter Ronald DeSouza and Sandeep Shastri; SAGE Publications 2009). He also writes regularly for national and regional newspapers, and is a recognized face on electronic media as an election expert.

180 Indian Youth and Electoral Politics

Contributors Vibha Attri is Researcher at Lokniti (CSDS). She was a member of the team which carried out the Youth and Politics in India study in 2011. She holds an MPhil in Political Science from Panjab University, Chandigarh, and has been trained in quantitative methods. Her research interests include electoral politics, Panchayati Raj Institutions, and the participation of women in politics. Jyoti Mishra is Researcher at Lokniti (CSDS). She was a member of the team which carried out the Youth and Politics in India study in 2011. She has completed her MPhil from the Centre for Political Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, and is pursuing her PhD there. Her research interests are business and politics, federal politics, party politics, and electoral politics. Kinjal Sampat has been exploring social sciences to define her worldview. She has worked as a researcher with Lokniti (CSDS), CSTEP, Bengaluru, and Jain University, Bengaluru. Her work has been on diverse topics ranging from legal consciousness to public opinion analysis. At present, she is working on her Masters thesis. Her previous degrees have been in Sociology (2010) from Delhi School of Economics and in Mass Media (2006) from Mumbai University. Shreyas Sardesai is Researcher at Lokniti (CSDS) since 2010 and handles key election-related survey projects. He is also a media professional with nearly seven years of experience in television news. He was part of the core team that launched the CNN–IBN channel in 2005 and worked there till 2010 as News Editor. He was also briefly associated with NDTV and Headlines Today. Shreyas is a graduate from St Stephen’s College, Delhi University, in History. He completed postgraduate study in Political Science at the Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.

Index

activities, political, 19 actors, political, 12–14 Adivasi voters, 60–61 age of Heads of Government, average, 102 age profile, of Indian Union Government ministers, 101 “Amongst All” option, in Ukraine, 99 anticorruption movement, by Anna Hazare, 20, 126 apathetic political participation, 19 Argentina compulsory voting in, 90 right to recall provision in, 80 Assembly elections, contesting of elections by women (1952–1998), 127 attitudinal factors, influence political awareness, 8 Australia, compulsory voting in, 90 awareness, 2, 15 Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), 48–49, 59–60 Banerjee, Mamta, 126 Belgium, compulsory voting in, 90 Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), 47–49, 51, 62, 109, 125 Adivasi vote for, 61 declining of vote share among college-educated youth, 57 among educated youth, 56

among urban youth, 54 upper-caste youth vote for, 58 Bihar Municipal Act, 81 candidates work, important consideration among youth, 65 career options, for youth Indians, 116–18 in politics, 118–23 Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), 2, 14, 19, 24, 63–64, 79, 97, 116 Chatterjee, Somnath, 79 Chhattisgarh Nagar Palika Act, 1961, 80 citizens, in democracy, 1 class, in rural area, 41 college educated youths participation in political discussions, 11 political interest among, 26 Communist Party of India, 48 Communist Party of India (Marxist), 48 compulsory voting, 86–94 Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, 95 Congress party, 47, 49 Adivasi vote for, 61 advantage among uneducated youth, 55 lost vote bank in 1990s, 48 popularity among Adivasi voters, 60

182 Indian Youth and Electoral Politics portray to represent youth, 48 young supporters doubt over electoral reforms, 109 young women voters vote to, 51–52 Constitution, Indian, 79, 90

supported by youth from upper and middle classes, 108 urban areas support for, 107 enthusiasm among young leader, 69 extra-electoral participation, 27, 40–41

Dalit voters, 60 youth, 49, 59 debarring candidates, above 65 years from contesting elections, 99–105 Delhi University Students’ Union, 27 democratic elected government, decisions of, 89 demonstration, political participation in, 39–43 Dikshit, Shiela, 126 dynastic politics, 71–75

France, voter turnout in, 29

educated class, awareness about political events, 8 educated strong opinion, on right to reject, 98 educated youths, support for setting of upper age limit for fighting elections, 105 education bridges rural–urban division, 120 effect on localities and political participation, 37 impact on politics, 25 level, urban vs rural youth, 5 election campaign activities, participation in, 122 Election Commission, 18, 78, 80, 85–86 electoral activities/participation among young women, 37 by rural youths, 36 youths participation in, 33–34 electoral reforms, 78, 106 men higher support for, 108 support among youths for, 107

Hazare, Anna, 20, 95, 126

Gandhi, Rahul, 47, 53, 63, 114 Gandhi, Sonia, 126 gap in voters turnout, between rural and urban areas, 30–31 gladiators political participation, 19 governance capacity, of youth leader, 66 Greece, compulsory voting in, 90 Gujarat Local Authorities Laws (Amendment) Bill 2009, 90–91

India: A Portrait (Patrick French), 71 “India Shining” slogan in 2004 elections, of BJP, 125 individuals participation, in political discussions, 10 industralized nations, decreasing voter turnout in, 29 informed citizens, 1 Jackman, R. W., 87 Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union elections, Supreme Court stay in 2008, 124 Jayalalithaa, 126 knowledge, 1 Krishnamurthy, T. S., 96 Kumar, Meira, 126 Kumar, Nitish, 125 leadership preference, 64–68 reasons for, 69–71

Index

183

Left parties, 48, 60 locality influence on voting pattern, 51 politics as career among young men, 120 Lok Sabha contesting of elections by women (1952–1998), 127 elections of 2009, 18, 92 support among youths who don’t vote in, 93 proportion of MPs in different age groups, 100 Vansh Sabha, 72 voters turnout in elections (1952– 2009), 87 Lyngdoh committee’s recommendations, 124

modernization process, 5 Modi, Narendra, 47

Mayawati, 126 media exposure among youths are in support of recall, 82 high participation rate in protests due to, 41 impact on political awareness level among youths, 6–7 impact on political participation, 37 members of legislative assembly (MLAs), 8–9, 71, 79, 127 members of Parliament (MPs), 8–9, 71–72, 79, 127 members of student, political participation by, 39 members participation, in protests, 42 Mexico, compulsory voting in, 90 middle-class in urban areas, participation in election-related activities, 35 youth interest in politics, 121 support for electoral reforms, 108

political awareness among Indian youth, 2–10 awareness level among citizens, 1–2 study of, 1–2 political discussions, 10–12 political events, 1 discussions on, 10–12 youth awareness about, 3, 7 political institutions, 12–14 political interest, 19 political issues, 1 politically aware youth, inclined to join politics, 122 political observation, 1 political participation analyses of, 20 categories of, 19 definition of, 19 in election-related activities, 33–39 measurement of, 19 in protest and demonstration, 39–43 through voting, 28–33 politics, 10–12

National Election Studies (NES), 24, 61, 63, 97 negative voting concept, 96 Netherlands, compulsory voting in, 90 non-dynasty MP, 73 “None of the above (NOTA)”, 95 None of these candidates option, in Nevada, 99 nonliterate, non-exposure to media and its impact, 9 older people, preference for youth leaders, 65 Other Backward Classes (OBCs), 58–59

184 Indian Youth and Electoral Politics

Samajwadi Party, 48 second democratic upsurge, 20 Singapore, nonvoters removal from electoral register, 90 Singh Patil, Pratibha Devi, 126 social networks, 10 spectators political participation, 19 Swaraj, Sushma, 126

unawareness about politics, among Indian youth, 3 uneducated youth, 53, 55 unicameralism, 87 Union Government ministers, Indian age profile of, 101 proportion in different age groups, 102 United Kingdom (UK), voter turnout in, 29 United States recall of state-level officials, 80 voter turnout in, 29–30 upper-caste voters, 57–58 upper class awareness about political events, 8 discussions about political institutions, 13–14 upper-class youth awareness about political events, 7 with high media exposure discuss political institutions, 14 urban areas support for electoral reforms, 107 support for fixation of upper age limit for fighting elections, 104 support for right to reject, 98 urban educated class, awareness about political events, 8 urbanization process, 5 urban youth awareness about politics and political events, 5 BJP decrease in vote share among, 54 inclined toward politics as career, 119 interest in politics among, 35 support for compulsory voting among, 92 support for right to recall, 83

UK Federal Commission (2002), 29

Vansh Sabha, 72

as career option Indian youths, 117–23 dynastic (see dynastic politics) interests in, 21–27 leadership preference (see leadership preference) persons interest in politics support compulsory voting, 95 political parties interest in, 27 reasons for not making politics as career, 123–26 women and, 126–29 poor people, non-exposure to media and its impact, 9 Putnam, Robert, 1 Quraishi, S. Y., 96 Rajasthan Municipalities Act 2011, 80–81 regional parties, 58 Representation of People Act, 1951, 79 Right to Recall, 79–86, 106 Right to Reject, 94–99 rural youth awareness about politics and political events, 4 exposure to media, 6 interest in politics among, 35 turnout in vote among, 31 vs urban youth, 5

Index

Venezuela compulsory voting in, 90 right to recall provision in, 80 voters turnout advantage for political party, 50 among different age groups, 29 among rural youths, 31 around world, 88 divided OBC voters, 59 in Lok Sabha elections (19522009), 87 trends in India, 20 young men vs women, comparison between, 31 vote/voting compulsory (see compulsory voting) political interest through, 28–33 value by youth more aware about political events, 10 women, young discussions about political institutions, 14 non-participation in political discussions, 11 political awareness among, 4 political interest among, 23, 25 politics as career option among, 126–29 politics by, 12 vote for Congress party, 52 voter turnout among, 30 World Development Report (2007), 20 Yadav, Akhilesh, 48 young dynasty candidates preference over non-dynasty MP, 73 preference over political lineage by youth, 75

185

support from those who opposed dynasty politics, 74 young Left supporters, 109 young men, politics by, 12 youth factor in politics, 63 youths, Indian activeness in political institutions, 13 awareness about politics among, 2–10 discussion about political events, 11 educational attainment impact on, 53 higher level of education and support for compulsory voting, 93 high support among for right to recall, 82 for right to reject, 97 interested in politics more aware, 10 political interest level among, 22 political participation in protests by, 40 politics as career option, 123 support for electoral reforms among, 107 voter turnout among, 30 youth wings, political participation by, 39 yuva neta (youth/young leader), 63 are better educated, 70 better evaluation by young respondents, 71 better for development, 66 support for among women, 68 among youth, 67 youth and old preference for, 65