New Delhi- The proposed One Nation, One Election (ONOE) Bill has triggered a significant political discourse, with different parties taking contrasting stances. The Telugu Desam Party (TDP) has come out in strong support of the legislation, while the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) vehemently opposes it.

Representing the TDP, Minister of State for Communications Chandra Sekhar Pemmasani highlighted several potential benefits of the proposed bill. He emphasized the substantial cost savings that could be achieved by conducting simultaneous elections. Citing previous election commission expenditures of over Rs 6,000 crore in 2019 and Rs 10,000 crore in 2024, Pemmasani argued that synchronized elections could reduce costs by up to 40%.

The TDP leader also pointed to potential advantages beyond financial savings. He suggested that simultaneous polls could increase voter turnout by approximately 7% and provide greater continuity in governance. Pemmasani criticized the current electoral system, questioning the operational challenges created by frequent elections in different states.

In stark contrast, AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi presented a robust opposition to the bill. He argued that the proposed legislation fundamentally challenges democratic principles and constitutional rights. Owaisi's primary contention is that the bill would undermine the constitutional provision of five-year legislative tenures, particularly in cases of mid-term dissolutions.

Owaisi was particularly critical of what he perceives as the bill's underlying motivations. He accused the proposed legislation of being designed to serve executive convenience rather than constitutional purposes. The AIMIM leader went further, claiming the bill is structured to "finish off" regional parties and primarily serves to "massage the ego of the supreme leader".

The AIMIM president warned that the bill could indirectly transform India's democratic structure, suggesting it might introduce elements of a presidential system. He emphasized that Parliament lacks the competence to introduce laws that potentially violate fundamental rights or the basic constitutional framework.

The debate highlights the complex political dynamics surrounding electoral reforms in India, with different political parties interpreting the potential implications of the One Nation, One Election proposal through their distinct ideological lenses.

As the discussion continues, the bill remains a contentious piece of proposed legislation that could significantly reshape India's electoral landscape.