“We mounted a spirited campaign throughout which we witnessed a great deal of goodwill and support towards our party. But organisationally we were not able to transform that goodwill into votes.” Sonia Gandhi, on May 16, 2007, after the party’s rout in the Uttar Pradesh assembly election.

In the three years that separate these two speeches, the Congress-led UPA government at the Centre has been on an overdrive to win over the aam aadmi through enhanced spending in welfare. Spending on education trebled from Rs 12,000 crore to Rs 32,000 crore and for health and family welfare the allocation more than doubled during these three years, from Rs 7,620 crore to Rs 17,560 crore. Funding for agriculture and rural development also trebled, from around Rs 20,000 crore to over Rs 60,000 crore. A good chunk of these welfare allocations has gone to states such as UP and Bihar where the Congress is virtually non-existent. However, the Congress has not been able to claim any political dividend. At best, the aam aadmi has some goodwill for the Congress, but goodwill doesn’t necessarily win elections. The Congress does not have a mechanism to tell the aam aadmi that economic reforms, growth and welfare are mutually complementary and one cannot happen in the absence or failure of the others.

There are broadly two set of factors that could favour the Congress in the event of an election. First, what can be called the aam aadmi schemes that could connect the party to the sections of society that have been unhappy with the Congress since the early 1990s. The second is the external political environment — that includes the BJP governments in crucial states facing anti-incumbency and UPA allies clinging to the Congress for tactical considerations. These objective conditions could theoretically help the Congress in improving its position. The Indian Express-CNN IBN-CSDS survey that predicted an increase in Congress strength if an election were to take place today was partly a reflection of the goodwill for the party and partly arising out of the favourable environmental factors.

Congress optimism may therefore be justified to a large extent but needs to be qualified given the organisational weaknesses that have only worsened in recent years. One can flag a few of these.

‘That concerns the government’ is the stock reply of Congress spokespersons on a wide-range of issues, repeatedly exposing a disconnect between the organisation and government. In the first two years of the UPA government, Sonia Gandhi wrote at least twice to Congress ministers that they must visit the district party offices in the places that they visit, but this instruction has rarely been followed. In mid-2006, in the midst of the party’s confusion on the OBC reservation issue, it was decided that MoS in the PMO Prithviraj Chauhan and party media department chairman Janardan Dwivedi would meet every week so that the government and organisational wings of the party function in tandem. Evidently it has not yielded results. As the Ram Setu affidavit controversy raged last week, the party had nothing to say because it was a ‘governmental matter.’

Two, a lot many of the party’s committees and posts are either vacant, or occupied reluctantly. Pranab Mukherjee resigned as West Bengal party chief in early 2006 — his resignation has not been accepted or a new president appointed. In Tamil Nadu, P. Krishnaswamy is state president for more than a year, but has not been allowed to constitute an executive. In Madhya Pradesh — a state where the Congress won only four of 29 seats in 2004 and expects big gains — state president Subhash Yadav is a lightweight among the warring biggies, such as Suresh Pachauri, Kamal Nath, Jyotiraditya Scindia and Digvijay Singh. In Rajasthan, where the Congress hopes to increase from its present strength of four, state president B.D. Kulla expects to be removed anytime. So is the case with the party’s student and youth wings — for instance, in election-bound Himachal Pradesh, the student and youth wing presidents have been there for the last decade and want to leave. Now it has been decided to maintain status-quo until elections — meaning, reluctant chiefs will lead the party! In Madhya Pradesh, there is no president for the Youth Congress for two years. In Chhattisgarh, the PCC chief attracts a crowd of 200 in his meetings.

From the Hyderabad plenary in January 2006 onwards, a reshuffle of the AICC has been pending — since then seniors like Ambika Soni and A.K. Antony have moved to the cabinet and several have proved their disinterest or inefficiency. The possible entry of Rahul Gandhi is now delaying a restructuring. Everything must fit into Rahul’s scheme of things. Meanwhile, the institution of AICC general secretaries acting as arbiter of disputes in states under their charge has collapsed in recent years. General secretaries end up in one camp or other. Digvjjay Singh is perceived to be shielding the CMs of Andhra and Assam from dissidents. Janardan Dwivedi is thick with Haryana CM Bhupinder Hooda but was at logger heads with Amarinder Singh in Punjab. Dissatisfied elements in the states queue up at 10 Janpath for an audience — Sonia Gandhi’s primary engagement with the party is in settling petty clashes.

Finally, the Congress has failed in propaganda. The party’s mouthpiece Sandesh has rarely managed to set the political agenda as the Organiser or the People’s Democracy do often. Stung by the flurry of literature against the Congress in the wake of the nuclear debate, the party has set up last month — but not announced — a committee of four for publicity and literature. Digvijay Singh, Mukul Wasnik, Nirmal Khatri and Mohan Prakash have produced one booklet on the nuclear deal and another one is forthcoming.

The Congress repeatedly says it is ready for an election anytime. However, unless these issues relating to the organisation are addressed decisively, Sonia Gandhi, after the next elections, could well end up delivering a speech only marginally amended from the ones quoted above.