A new study out in India claims that “in the last decade, at least one-fifth of the country’s electorate was paid cash for their votes.” [HT MR] The study also claims that this percentage (unsurprisingly) is far higher amongst those living below the poverty line, with as many as 94% of Andhra voters below the poverty line alleged to have sold their votes. The side of the bribe varies from around $3/voter up to (and this I find hard to believe) $25:
The bribe money varies from state to state. It may be Rs100-150 (a voter) in some states and it can go up to Rs1,000 in some constituencies [link]
[Huge graphic of findings below the fold]
I don’t have a problem believing that there is vote buying in India - there’s huge corruption throughout the electoral system. Furthermore, vote buying is common behavior in many democracies, including when America was younger.
Washington and Jefferson bought elections using alcohol; Washington paid 40 pounds (a huge sum in those days) to win an election against a more popular rival for the VA legislature in 1758. These practices continued after the founding of the Republic:
Some politicians had been known to buy votes and pay repeat voters. In 1823 the price of a vote in New York City was $5 and for repeat voters, went as high as $30. [link]
I’m also not surprised that poor people who are willing to sell their labor and their bodies just to stay alive might be willing to take a payment.
No, what I have trouble with is the fact that the article reports the conclusions of this study while waving their hands concerning how these numbers were estimated:
Explaining the methodology for the study, Rao said CMS used a perception, experience and estimation method to arrive at its conclusions. “Not many will admit they have been bribed to cast their vote,” he said. “But, in confidence, they would let you know if they knew someone who has taken money.” [link]
Without knowing how they came to their conclusion, I’m going to have to suspend judgment on their figures.
Lastly, I’m not sure how much vote buying actually buys. If the vote is secret, or secret enough, then voters can simply take the money and then vote for whoever they want. (In fact, poorer opposition parties in some African countries encourage voters to do this since they don’t have enough money to win the bidding war). And if the vote isn’t secret, then why not simply tamper with it directly?
