New Delhi:
The Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) examining the One Nation, One Election (ONOE) proposal on Tuesday heard detailed submissions from leading economists, who highlighted the potential macroeconomic, fiscal and governance benefits of holding simultaneous elections across the country.
The meeting, chaired by BJP MP PP Chaudhary, was held in connection with the Constitution (One Hundred and Twenty-Ninth Amendment) Bill, 2024 and the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2024, which form the legislative basis for the ONOE initiative.
According to sources present at the meeting, Gita Gopinath, Professor of Economics at Harvard University and former First Deputy Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), told the committee that reducing the frequency of elections could have a meaningful positive impact on India’s economic performance.
Gopinath cited empirical evidence showing that private investment typically slows during election years, with an estimated decline of nearly 5 per cent, followed by only a partial recovery in the years that follow. Fewer elections, she said, would reduce uncertainty for businesses and investors, helping to sustain higher levels of private investment over time.
She also noted that election years often see higher primary fiscal deficits and lower capital expenditure, affecting the quality and efficiency of government spending. According to her submission, a shift to simultaneous elections could improve both fiscal discipline and the composition of public expenditure, allowing governments to focus more on long-term capital investments rather than short-term populist measures.
Sources said Gopinath referred to estimates by former Finance Commission Chairman N K Singh, suggesting that the combined effect of higher investment, improved fiscal efficiency and reduced uncertainty could lead to a 1.5 per cent increase in GDP, translating into roughly Rs 4.5 lakh crore in additional economic output.
She also highlighted the high cost of elections in India, especially when political party spending is factored in, and argued that ONOE could significantly reduce overall election-related expenditure. Gopinath described the proposal not merely as an administrative change, but as a structural macroeconomic reform, sources added.
The committee also heard from Sanjeev Sanyal, Member of the Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister, who, according to sources, said that while cost savings from simultaneous elections are important, they should not be seen as the primary justification for the reform.
Sanyal told the panel that staggered elections impose substantial economic and governance costs due to repeated disruptions caused by the enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct, frequent policy pauses, and the diversion of political leadership and administrative machinery towards election campaigning. These factors, he said, undermine policy continuity and slow down decision-making.
Sources said Sanyal argued that ONOE would allow for simultaneous discussion of national and state-level issues, improve coordination between different levels of government, and enhance political stability. This, in turn, would support long-term policymaking and more predictable governance, benefiting both economic growth and institutional effectiveness.
The Joint Parliamentary Committee is continuing consultations with experts, policymakers and stakeholders as part of its ongoing examination of the ONOE legislation.