To get back to the point, 2004 Lok Sabha doesn’t present a pretty picture. Will 2009 be different? That’s a function of collective citizen choice and information dissemination and use. For Parliament, we don’t have a time-series on whether voting patterns have become more informed and demanding. However, we have begun to have it for states, courtesy compilation of affidavits by the Delhi-based Liberty Institute. These are yet incomplete and we will get a time-series only when states go through elections in 2008 and beyond. Consequently, an interesting question like criminal antecedents can’t yet be probed, not until we have data for states like Bihar, UP, MP and Jharkhand.

However, consider the 2008 Karnataka elections. The richest MLA, M. Krishnappa, was elected from Vijay Nagar constituency on a Congress ticket and had assets worth Rs 129 crore. Twenty-five out of 218 MLAs had assets worth more than Rs 10 crore. In 2004 in Karnataka, the richest MLA, J. Krishna Palemar, was elected from Surathkal constituency on a BJP ticket and had assets worth Rs 34.6 crore. Forty-five out of 211 MLAs had assets worth more than Rs 10 crore. While it is difficult to control for other variables, there is no evidence to suggest that the importance of money in fighting elections is becoming less.

In comparison, the average Delhi MLA (2003) is quite poor. Vijay Singh Lochav, the richest, was elected on a Congress ticket from Mahipalpur and had assets worth only Rs 2.8 crore. A pity, one can’t track the financial enrichment of candidates as they become legislators and ministers.

... contd.