• Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Middle East logoCarnegie lettermark logo
LebanonIran
{
  "authors": [
    "Milan Vaishnav"
  ],
  "type": "other",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "SAP",
  "programs": [
    "South Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [
    "India Elects 2019"
  ],
  "regions": [
    "South Asia",
    "India"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Democracy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

Other

‘Most Advantageous Thing BJP Could Do Is Real Political Finance Reform... It Would Still Out-Fundraise Opponents’

While genuine political finance reform would be politically popular for the BJP, recent moves have done little to enhance transparency or dampen flow of black money.

Link Copied
By Milan Vaishnav
Published on Jul 23, 2018
Project hero Image

Project

India Elects 2019

India Elects 2019 provides expert analysis on India’s national elections and their impact on the country’s economy, domestic policy, and foreign relations. It brings together insights from Carnegie’s experts in Washington, New Delhi, and around the world.

Learn More

Source: Times of India

In your research into political funding, what are some of the interesting findings?

First, we have seen the dramatic rise of self-financing candidates. It is virtually impossible to win elections today unless you have deep pockets or connections to lucrative networks. Second, although sources of finance may be undisclosed, much of the spending is on routine activities such as fees for attendance, salaries, and meals. Of course, significant funds are reserved for election eve handouts. But we find that these handouts are better described as ‘gift giving’ rather than ‘vote buying’; there is no quid pro quo between voters and politicians. Rather, politicians provide handouts either to signal their viability or fear of loss if they do not.

Election Commission’s expenditure limits for elections are periodically raised but are these realistic?

I have personally never met a politician who believes he or she can win by strictly adhering to the limits. The whole regime of expenditure limits is somewhat farcical. Netas complain the limits are too low, yet in their own expenditure statements MPs elected in 2014 claimed only to have spent half of the ceiling. In my view, it makes more sense to eliminate the limits but insist on 100% transparency for every political contribution and expenditure. If politicians violate this bargain, EC should be able to slap severe sanctions.

What are the heads on which candidates spend most money?

There is a lot of variation on expenditure. Simon Chauchard’s analysis of an urban Maharashtra assembly constituency finds huge differences between parties: whereas Shiv Sena candidate spent between Rs 1-2 crore, NCP candidate spent between Rs 9-16 crore. Anywhere between 20-65% of funds are reserved for gift giving, depending on party. This means, while ‘black money’ is an issue, a great deal of spending is so-called ‘work money’ – wages and remuneration for workers, supporters, and ‘influentials’. Sources of finance depend on level of politics. For instance, using survey data from Bihar, Jharkhand and UP, Jennifer Bussel finds that MPs and MLAs are substantially more likely to report receiving party funds compared to lower levels. Panchayat leaders are substantially more dependent on their own resources.

How can EC be reformed so that it can better monitor political funding?

On contributions, the best way to ensure transparency is to insist that parties go digital. Every donor should be required to submit a PAN or Aadhaar number when making a donation. On spending, EC needs greater authority to penalise candidates who do not submit their statements on time or who obfuscate. This requires revamping the Representation of the People Act. As for parties, nobody trusts their accounts. In our view, party accounts should be subject to independent scrutiny by a respected third-party auditor. The disclosure of false accounts is not much better than no disclosure.

How do you assess recent attempts to thwart unaccounted money flows into politics? Is there a danger of one party gaming the system to its advantage?

Recent moves will do very little to enhance transparency or dampen flow of black money. In UP elections following demonetisation, EC seized more than Rs 115 crore in cash, three times the cash recovered in 2012. As for electoral bonds, their upside is that corporations now have a legitimate channel to contribute funds to parties while protecting their anonymity. But the upside is also the downside: transparency, as far as public is concerned, is arguably the biggest victim. Then in the recent FCRA change where Congress and BJP joined hands to save their skin, they did so under the cover of darkness using fine print in the Finance Act, adding insult to injury. In sum, there is a certain ‘honour among thieves’. Arguably the most politically advantageous thing BJP could do is enact real political finance reform. It would be a political winner and, given BJP’s current strength, it would still out-fundraise its opponents. But government clearly has a different view.

How much harder does cash economy make regulation of political finance?

Government has launched a war on cash but it has taken contradictory steps. Cash is opaque so it pushed for electoral bonds, which rely on digital transactions but are completely hidden from public view. The Finance Act instituted a new Rs 2,000 limit for cash donations. But why not take it down to zero and insist on digital transactions? Whenever an arbitrary limit is imposed, it is an incentive for those wanting to game the system.

This article was originally published in the Times of India.

About the Author

Milan Vaishnav

Director and Senior Fellow, South Asia Program

Milan Vaishnav is a senior fellow and director of the South Asia Program and the host of the Grand Tamasha podcast at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. His primary research focus is the political economy of India, and he examines issues such as corruption and governance, state capacity, distributive politics, and electoral behavior. He also conducts research on the Indian diaspora.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    Indian Americans Still Lean Left. Just Not as Reliably.
      • +1

      Sumitra Badrinathan, Devesh Kapur, Andy Robaina, …

  • Paper
    Indian Americans in a Time of Turbulence: 2026 Survey Results
      • +1

      Milan Vaishnav, Sumitra Badrinathan, Devesh Kapur, …

Milan Vaishnav
Director and Senior Fellow, South Asia Program
Milan Vaishnav
Political ReformDemocracySouth AsiaIndia

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

  • Civic Activisim in an Intensifying Climate Crisis
    Research
    Civic Activism in an Intensifying Climate Crisis

    To address the deepening climate crisis, climate activism is employing a wider variety of tactics and aiming at a broader set of goals. In response, the movement faces stronger repression and civic backlash against climate action.

      Erin Jones, Richard Youngs

  • Commentary
    Sada
    Navigating Danger: Syrian Refugees in Lebanon Risk Returning

    A humanitarian crisis in Lebanon deepens, and Syrian refugees face a perilous choice: remain in a war-torn environment or return to Syria where they risk encountering significant dangers and discrimination. There are significant challenges and risks to their search for safety in Syria.

      Haid Haid

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Disquiet on the West Asian Front

    In an interview, Abhinav Pandya discusses the multiple facets of India’s ties with the Middle East.

      Armenak Tokmajyan

  • Paper
    Borders Without a Nation: Syria, Outside Powers, and Open-Ended Instability

    In Syria’s border regions, changes in demographics, economics, and security mean that an inter-Syrian peace process will require consensus among main regional powers that Syria must remain united, that no one side can be victorious, and that perennial instability threatens the region.

      Kheder Khaddour, Armenak Tokmajyan

  • Research
    The Military and Private Business Actors in the Global South: The Politics of Market Access

    The interaction of national armed forces and private business sectors offers a useful lens for viewing the politics of numerous countries of the so-called Global South. A rising trend of military political activism—often accompanied by military commercial activity—underlines the importance of drivers and outcomes in these relationships.

      Yezid Sayigh, Hamza Meddeb

Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
Carnegie Middle East logo, white
  • Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.