Retributions  

Throwing out the bums is no solution

If there was any remaining doubt about A. Raja’s culpability in the massive 2G spectrum scam, the damning Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG ) report should suffice to convince the most skeptical. While it is possible that the purported loss to the exchequer—1.71 lakh crore—may be an exaggeration, there is little doubt about the flagrant violation of all government norms by Mr. Raja’s ministry to reward the chosen few.

And yet Mr. Raja soldiers on with full support of his party and acquiescence of the Congress leadership and the prime minister Dr. Manmohan Singh. It is easy to understand why Mr. Raja’s party doesn’t give two hoots about his corruption. The Indian voter has generally proven to be highly tolerant of corruption particularly in case of regional parties. In Southern states there is wide-spread acceptance of entrepreneurial corruption where politicians enrich themselves but some benefits flow to the people too. Besides, Mr. Karunanidhi’s principal opposition, Ms. Jayalalita, is so deeply mired in corruption that it is hard to imagine that she has any moral standing left to question his party.

The reasons for Congress party’s reluctance to act against Mr. Raja may be more complex. The obvious reason of course is the compulsion of coalition politics; the UPA government at the centre needs DMK’s support for its survival. Nevertheless, it is hard to imagine that if the Congress party really put its foot down, DMK would rock the boat only to ensure Mr. Raja’s survival. Another DMK minister is likely to replace Mr. Raja and the ATM of telecom ministry can be expected to produce unhindered. Equally, DMK it self needs the support of Congress party for its government’s survival in Tamil Nadu.

By acing against Ashok Chavan, the Congress party has shown that it cares for its image among the middle class—the only constituency in India which even marginally votes on corruption. And yet it feels no compulsion to act against A Raja whose scale of corruption can only be described as monumental. Perhaps the answer lies in UPA government’s first avatar. UPA-1 faced an obscurantist Left which appeared to dictate government policies in lieu of its support. Despite a wavering prime minister repeatedly heckled as weak by BJP, and the dormant policy agenda, the general elections were a resounding success for the Congress party while the Left was virtually wiped out. It appeared that Indian voter, long enamoured with intent rather than concrete policy, successfully bought the Congress’ claim of being a “victim” and punished what it perceived to be a hectoring opposition.

The same equation may be at play here. The case the Congress party is making to the middle class voter is simple: “Look, we are against corruption. We are ready to act against the corrupt in our own party. We would have acted against A Raja only if we did not need his party’s support. Next time, make sure we don’t need the support of such elements.” It won’t be surprising that instances like A Raja may actually result in Congress emerging with a larger majority in 2014. The Congress party deserves praise for transforming weakness and victim hood in to a successful political formula.  Now, it is possible that a relentless opposition, constant media spotlight, and legal compulsions force the resignation of Mr. Raja but it is hard to see any political downside to his continuation in the cabinet.

Milton Friedman once argued that the answer to political corruption is not “throwing the bums out”—rather, it is to provide incentives for the wrong people to make the right decisions. Till the Indian voter provides those political incentives, expect the likes of Mr. Raja to thrive.