Tamil Nadu poll verdict 2016: A rash of big-ticket freebies ensured a second term for the AIADMK

At the end of polling on May 16, a Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader said in an aside to this reporter: “Makkal romba mosam aagittaanga (People have become very bad). They have become corrupt. Even those living in apartments are asking for money.” He probably missed the irony in his statement. It was, after all, the DMK that opened the floodgates of cash for votes in 2009 with the now infamous Thirumangalam formula, the brainchild of DMK chief M Karunanidhi’s son MK Azhagiri.

Tamil Nadu has spoken — the mandate is handed to J Jayalalithaa, leader of the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam ( AIADMK), a historic win after 1984 when her mentor MG Ramachandran came to power in two consecutive terms.

But the numbers show that Tamil Nadu was not altogether happy with the ruling party. In 2011, the AIADMK swept to power on a massive mandate — 150 out of 165 seats contested in the alliance, a win rate of 91%. Five of these 165 seats went to smaller allies who contested on the Two Leaves symbol of AIADMK. This time, the party has won 134 of the 232 seats, including those of the seven allies contesting under its symbol. This comes to a win rate of about half the previous term’s: about 58%.

The DMK, on the other hand, has done exceedingly well compared with 2011: from 23 seats it has moved up to 89 for itself, along with 8 seats won by ally Congress and 1 seat by another ally, the Indian Union Muslim League. The biggest disaster of 2016 was the demolition of the Third Front, reducing the “Alternative” to a mere myth. Leaders of the Front themselves lost, with Vijayakanth leader of the Desiya Murpokku Dravida Kazhagam (DMDK), and Thol Thirumavalavan biting the dust. Vijayakanth even lost his deposit in Ulundurpet.



Anbumani Ramadoss’s Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) too were humbled at the hustings. What this points to, say political observers, is the lack of faith of voters in political parties and leaders. And this distrust has been brought on by the destruction of ideologybased politics in the state. “In the Third Front, Vijayakanth, Vaiko and GK Vasan are leaders of parties that have no ideological basis,” says C Lakshmanan, political analyst and associate professor at the Madras Institute of Development Studies.

“Only the Left parties and Thirumavalavan can lay claim to ideological politics, apart from the two Dravidian majors,” he said. At the launch of his party in Madurai in 2005, Vijayakanth, when questioned about the ideology of his party, asked reporters to tell him what to say. Ten years later, he and his party have come full circle. From a lone seat won by him in 2005 and polling an unprecedented 8% of votes, the party’s base has eroded to 2.4%.

Aazhi Senthilnathan, political commentator, laments the erosion of ideology. “No one speaks of ideology. Anbumani says, ‘Anbumani aagiya naan (I’m Anbumani).’ Karunanidhi says, ‘I will sign the prohibition order when I come to power.’ Vijayakanth stands for no ideology, nor does Vaiko. It is all about I, me and myself.” In the absence of a politics of ideology, says Senthilnathan, people stick to status quo, and often freebies and cash for votes decides the winning margins. “There is a need for ideological politics to come back,” he says.

The Freebie Way
The DMK took a stand ahead of the polls that it would implement prohibition and stay away from the freebie culture, which the party itself started in 2006, with the announcement of free colour television. The only freebies announced in its 2016 manifesto were free internet for students and free smartphones for poor farmers.

Jayalalithaa, on the other hand, announced more free gold for women under the Thaalikku Thangam (Gold for Mangalsutras) scheme, 50% discount on scooters for working women, free mobile phones for ration card holders, 100 units of free power a month as well as free internet for students. Apart from such announcements, cash was allegedly distributed rampantly by parties. The Election Commission tried to crack down on this, but it could only tackle the tip of the iceberg.

In 2011, the DMK, the party in power at the time, had the upper hand. But even at that time, there were reports of large-scale cash distribution. There was, however, a wave against the DMK government over rampant land grabbing and rowdyism by the party cadre. In spite of cash coming its way, Tamil Nadu voted in the AIADMK with a sweeping majority, relegating the DMK to third place with a mere 23 seats.

That sort of a wave was not evident in 2016, although anti-incumbency was present. Surprisingly close victory margins have been seen in over 50 seats. And experts agree that these margins could have well been won by tactical usage of cash and the lure of freebies. Tamil Nadu has in fact given a clear mandate. Their vote has been almost nostalgic — for parties that have deep ideological roots in the state. The newbies and frivolous players have been given the boot.