Why not elect two instead of just one? After all don’t we have joint secretary concept?
I am overwhelmed by the fact that there are at least 500 people willing to serve me and you.
And how did I arrive at this figure? Just look at the number of people who are left in the fray for the 28 Lok Sabha seats from Karnataka.
If they are all contesting an election it obviously means that they want to serve the people. If not why should they toil in the scorching sun soliciting votes from you and me.
But the sad fact is that of these half a thousand aspirants only 28 can make it.
The contest is much tougher and more expensive than taking the KPSC exam.
The rest will have to wait for another five years to get an opportunity to serve you and me.
But they are all so enthusiastic that all of them are claiming that they would make it to New Delhi.
That should be the spirit of service.
Gone are the days when only full time politicians plunged into the poll arena.
Now the field is wide open and those on bail, those who may go jail and those facing some probe or the other are also keen on trying their luck at the hustings.
And who knows the highest court of the country - that is the people’s court -might give some of them an opportunity to represent the state in the Parliament.
If this is not democracy at play what else is? No wonder the whole world is fascinated by this poll dance.
Another fascinating point I notice is that most of these seat aspirants are crorepatis.
And their wives also.
In fact some of the wives are richer than their hubbies.
If this is not empowerment of women what else is, please tell me. Some of these hubbies do not own cars and this is unbelievable yet true!
How they manage to reach out to voters without a car is beyond my imagination.
Another interesting financial titbit is that wives lend money to husbands and vice versa. Money is above family ties?
Of the 500 plus, as I said earlier, only 28 will breast the tape in the ballot race. What will happen to the rest?
Isn’t it a pity that so many have to feel the disappointment? So why not elect two instead of just one?
This will have 28 more winners and the two can share the work or the earnings. After all don’t we have joint secretary concept?
You may find my logic weird but just look at the astronomical sums that need to be spent these days to get an opportunity to serve the people.
And since our electorate is unpredictable it is possible that the man who has spent a bit less might make it leaving the opponent who has spent more licking his wound.
Hence this double representation idea as a consolation prize. The representation of people Act needs to move with the times.