
It was over 17 years ago when Lalu Prasad Yadav was first named in the “fodder scam”, the popular name for an embezzlement of Rs 950 crore (Rs 2,000 crore at today’s value) of government funds meant to buy food and medicines for livestock. As the fraud took place in the 1990s when Yadav was Bihar’s chief minister, he was accused of protecting the scammers who gave forged receipts for fodder and medicines never bought. In these long years, while the trial in the criminal case for the embezzlement moved at a snail’s space, Yadav rode to the top of his political career and crashed to its bottom too.
After formal charges in the case forced him to resign as CM in July 1997, Yadav shockingly replaced himself with his homemaker wife, Rabri Devi, the mother of his nine children. He thus continued to rule as the de facto power. Despite the wide outrage at this subversion of democratic principles, his Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) thumped to a win in the 2000 assembly elections. Four years later, he won a whopping 24 Lok Sabha seats, becoming a kingmaker that saw the Congress, once his archenemy, seize New Delhi. Yadav would go on to be India’s most famous railway minister, turning the railways around and lecturing business school students on how to make the public sector profitable.
Then came the fall. In 2005, the RJD stunningly lost the state after 15 years, whipped for criminalising politics and society and for failing to bring development. In the 2009 Lok Sabha elections, the RJD was nearly wiped out, winning only four of the state’s 40 seats. Yadav humiliatingly lost one of the two seats he contested. At the 2010 state elections, the RJD performed even worse than it had in 2005. His wife lost both seats she fought on.
And now he is in jail. Does today’s ruling, by a judge in Ranchi city of neighbouring Jharkhand state, that Yadav is guilty in the case mark the end of his career? Or will it become his vehicle to ride back to power by making him a martyr with the state’s backward castes, to which he belongs and who number some two in five of Bihar’s electorate?
Both answers can be affirmative depending on an assessment of his current political relevance and abilities. If you believe Yadav is still the magician from the past with his core USP intact, the jailing would consolidate his backward votes at next year’s Lok Sabha elections ending an eight-year rough patch. He may then realistically dream of returning to power in the state too in the 2015 elections. But if you think the factors that pitchforked him to the fore of Bihar’s and national politics a quarter century ago are passé, like bell-bottoms, tape-recorders and child marriage, then his jailing would hardly move voters.
Of course, it may be hasty to suggest the last word from the judges has been heard. Yadav will certainly appeal the conviction at the high court where he will argue that there is no evidence of his direct involvement. Abdul Bari Siddiqui, an RJD leader who is the Leader of the Opposition in the Bihar state assembly, told this reporter last month in Patna that the only role Yadav is accused of is that he extended by a year the service of a state official named Shyam Bihari Sinha who headed the animal husbandry department, the nodal agency where the scam occurred. Sinha, the prime accused, later died in judicial custody.
Yadav’s aides think a martyr’s halo would make a good situation better. They reckon the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) split from Bihar’s ruling Janata Dal (United) in June has in two ways improved the RJD’s chances to repossess the top political slot. One, the coalition of the upper castes, who’re the BJP’s mainstay, and the backward castes, who the JD(U) brought to that union, has now broken. And two, anti-incumbency of the last eight years would go against both the JD(U) and the BJP, which was in government until June.
Be that as it may, there is no denying that Yadav’s political reality today is substantially different than what it was in the 1990s when the fodder scam made him toxic for all other parties, which led him to split what was until then the Janata Dal to form his own party. (Ironically, in the years the fodder scam’s taint stuck to his chest, he stayed on top of his career. His jailing comes when few remember the fraud or his involvement in it.)
For one, scam or no scam, Lalu was the tallest politician in Bihar throughout the 1990s despite the existence of many national-level leaders from the state. That began to change after his one-time-protégé-turned-rival Nitish Kumar became chief minister in October 2005. Today, Kumar is perceived to have dramatically slashed crime and launched schemes to help the disadvantaged in the backward castes, the Dalits and the Muslims, forcefully carving out a slot for himself as a latter-day social engineer and messiah. Reinforcing that impression, Kumar convincingly won reelection in 2010.
Although Kumar, too, continues to face criticism, especially over rampant corruption, he has the meat to stall Yadav’s revival. Importantly, the mantle of a champion of the backwards castes and the poor that Kumar claims for himself is exactly the mantle that Yadav gave himself to emerge as the state’s chief minister for the first time in 1990.
Unarguably one of India’s most trailblazing politicians of the last three decades, Yadav is correctly credited with irrevocably changing the power dynamics in Bihar. Before his spectacular rise, the upper castes, who are some 12 percent of Bihar’s 100 million people, sat atop the caste-based coalitions that ruled Bihar, mostly through the Congress party. Yadav reversed that. Today, not only do backward and lower castes top the ranks in every political party, they also dictate and direct the political agenda. Indeed, Kumar would never have become chief minister had Yadav not altered the basic DNA of Bihar’s politics.
Yadav’s other enormously significant success lay in containing the virus of Hindu communalism that swept nearly every state in north and central India in the late 1980s and through much of the 1990s in the wake of the BJP-led movement to replace the 16th-century Babri mosque at Ayodhya town in Uttar Pradesh with a Hindu temple. Just a few months after becoming CM, Yadav famously arrested BJP leader LK Advani when his multi-state roadshow, which aimed to build support for the temple, reached Bihar.
In the 1991 Lok Sabha elections following Advani’s campaign, which made the Ayodhya issue a top electoral agenda, the BJP performed phenomenally well in the north and central states of UP, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh. Except in Bihar, where it won only five seats, all of them in the part that became Jharkhand a decade later, and none of the 40 seats that today constitute Bihar. Yadav successfully established the supremacy of caste politics so much so that the BJP could never make Hindutva rouse passions. Falling eventually in line with the caste politics, the BJP’s electoral successes have come only in a coalition with the JD(U) or its earlier versions.
That’s why the RJD thinks the BJP-JD(U) split would work to its advantage. Hence the party will make every attempt to paint Yadav’s conviction as a conspiracy aimed at maligning his reputation. Don’t be surprised if his wife and children, led by his eldest daughter and one or two sons, hit the road with a sob story as their primary calling card.
But will it work? Once again, Yadav’s and the RJD’s fates will be determined by Bihar’s Muslims, who are 18 percent of the population and have the potential to swing the election away from or towards him, regardless of his incarceration for corruption. Yadav had built his fortunes on the back of a solid coalition of Muslims and Yadavs, plus other backward castes. But CM Kumar has emerged as a rival claimant to the votes of the backwards.
For the Muslims, the top priority is to defeat the BJP, especially since it has chosen as its prime ministerial candidate Gujarat CM Narendra Modi, who the Muslims blame for the massacre of some 2,000 of their brethren over 11 years ago in Gujarat. Going constituency-wise in Bihar, the Muslims would vote for the candidate who appears strongest to defeat the BJP’s at the next Lok Sabha elections due in May.
This may be tricky for Yadav. If a JD(U) candidate seems like a winner in a constituency, the Muslims would not hesitate to back him. In order to gain Muslims’ votes, Yadav would need to ensure that the backward castes desert the chief minister in large numbers and flock to the RJD. Yadav can hardly hope to achieve that by targeting Kumar’s track record, which has certainly been better than the 15 years of the Yadav husband-wife misrule.
Yadav’s only hope lies in successfully projecting his conviction and jailing in the fodder scam as an injustice to him and his caste brethren by claiming that he’s been targeted as he empowered the backward castes socially and politically. However, should this pitch fail, Yadav may well be looking at political oblivion forever besides, of course, a long stretch in prison.
Lalu Jailed: RIP or Comeback Kid?
The Case (That Wasn’t) Against Lalu Yadav
If only politicians had the patience for details. There has been much hand-wringing among them since the Supreme Court ruled in July that an MP or an MLA/MLC would be unseated immediately upon conviction in a criminal case. Infamous attempts have been made by the men in white to write a new law and even bring an ordinance to restore status quo ante that allowed an elected representative to continue in office until an appeal against his conviction was disposed off.
The parliamentarians can, however, spare themselves the embarrassment of such clumsy acts if only they take the pains to read a 30 September ruling by a trial judge in faraway Jharkhand, who has found former Bihar chief minister Lalu Prasad Yadav guilty of patronising an intricate scheme of corruption that ran unchecked for years. As television news flashed those findings without bothering to dive into the 568-page judgment, millions of citizens wearied from decades of corruption felt vindicated by Lalu’s comeuppance.
Lalu’s conviction in one of the 54 cases of the ‘fodder scam’, the popular name given to widespread embezzlement of government funds in the early-to-mid-1990s in the purchase of medicines and fodder for the livestock of the poor, is no small irony for him. His rule of Bihar for 15 years is remembered less for the immense and irreversible empowerment his socialist politics brought to the backward castes and more for the utter lawlessness and crime it spawned, allowed and even patronised. That assessment only grew starker in comparison with the reign of his arch-rival, Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, who has ruled the state since 2005 and is credited with having vastly improved the state’s law and order.
Be that as it may, the imperatives of justice are clear beyond doubt, as the ‘Blackstone Ratio’, quoted above, enumerates. It is not this correspondent’s claim that Lalu bears no culpability in the massive fodder scam, for that can be revealed only by a thorough investigation of thousands of documents and the questioning of hundreds, which India’s premier sleuthing agency, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), failed to carry out.
Read More >
The Promise And Betrayal Of Lalu Prasad Yadav
A victim of his many indulgences, the champion of the subaltern probably considered good governance too much of a grind
“Isn’t he quite a rascal like Jack Sparrow?” wonders a young wannabe-socialite who calls Dhanno aka Anushka, Lalu Prasad Yadav’s sixth daughter and a designer, a groupie. “So cute, funny, good-hearted and yet so yucky!” That does not sound like me, Lalu would have protested. “I have been twice chief minister and once Union minister,” he reminded the special CBI court in Ranchi.
From his elder brother’s peons’ quarters at the Bihar Veterinary College to an upper divisional cell in Birsa Munda Central Jail at Hotwar in Ranchi, it has been quite a journey indeed, considering Lalu, as railway minister, always travelled in salons. “I work so much,” he reasoned to a hack, “If I don’t get all the comforts, I will go mad.”
Sparrow had pedigree and a legendary pirate for a father; Lalu, on the other hand, was born to just another poor Yadav; his father’s name never really mattered. But, within half a lifetime, he made ‘Yadav’ the biggest identity of strength and pride in Bihar. For a cavalier buffoon, he almost singlehandedly changed, in a matter of five years, the political demography of his state. For good.
Read More>
Lalu Jailed: RIP Or Comeback Kid?
Yadav’s only hope lies in successfully projecting his conviction and jailing in the fodder scam as an injustice to him and his caste brethren
It was over 17 years ago when Lalu Prasad Yadav was first named in the “fodder scam”, the popular name for an embezzlement of Rs 950 crore (Rs 2,000 crore at today’s value) of government funds meant to buy food and medicines for livestock. As the fraud took place in the 1990s when Yadav was Bihar’s chief minister, he was accused of protecting the scammers who gave forged receipts for fodder and medicines never bought. In these long years, while the trial in the criminal case for the embezzlement moved at a snail’s space, Yadav rode to the top of his political career and crashed to its bottom too.
After formal charges in the case forced him to resign as CM in July 1997, Yadav shockingly replaced himself with his homemaker wife, Rabri Devi, the mother of his nine children. He thus continued to rule as the de facto power. Despite the wide outrage at this subversion of democratic principles, his Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) thumped to a win in the 2000 assembly elections. Four years later, he won a whopping 24 Lok Sabha seats, becoming a kingmaker that saw the Congress, once his archenemy, seize New Delhi. Yadav would go on to be India’s most famous railway minister, turning the railways around and lecturing business school students on how to make the public sector profitable.
Read More >
ALSO READ
[egpost postid=”195416″ byline=”false” style=margin-top:0px;]
[egpost postid=”195625″ byline=”false”]
[egpost postid=”195592″ byline=”false”]
[egpost postid=”195414″ byline=”false”]
Lalu convicted in fodder scam, faces disqualification as MP
Ranchi, Sept 30 (PTI): In a body blow to RJD before next year’s Lok Sabha polls, its President Lalu Prasad was today convicted by a special CBI court here in the fodder scam corruption case that disqualifies him from Parliament and renders him ineligible for contesting elections for at least six years.
Another 44 accused, including former Bihar Chief Minister Jagannath Mishra, six politicians and four IAS officers, were also convicted by court of Pravas Kumar Singh for fraudulent withdrawal of Rs 37.7 crore from Chaibasa treasury.
The court fixed October 3 for pronouncement of sentence against Yadav, Mishra and others.
The RJD chief faces immediate disqualification as Lok Sabha member under a recent Supreme Court order that an MP or MLA would stand disqualified immediately if convicted by a court for crimes with punishment of two years or more and under some other laws even without jail sentence.
The August judgement of the Supreme Court struck down a provision in the electoral law that provided protection to sitting MPs and MLAs by allowing them to continue in their posts if they appeal against a lower court conviction and secure a stay of the order.
PODCAST
Lalu would have got protection from disqualification if the ordinance promulgated by the Centre was cleared by President Pranab Mukherjee but he is said to have some reservations and raised questions over it.
Meanwhile, Rahul Gandhi has compounded problems by attacking the ordinance and calling for its withdrawal, virtually sealing its fate.
RJD Spokesperson Manoj Jha said they would challenge the order in a higher court after the sentence is known.
Earlier, Prasad arrived at the special CBI court here before delivery of the verdict in the 17-year-old case.
The court had on September 17 set today’s date to pass orders in the case.
Among others, IAS officers Mahesh Prasad, Phoolchand Singh, Beck Juleus, K Arumugam, Income Tax officer A C Choudhary, former AHD officials and fodder suppliers were also among the accused.
Prasad had begun arguments on September 9 and ended it on September 17 after the Supreme Court turned down his request to change the current special court to another court after he apprehended political conspiracy.
Following the Animal Husbandry scam, popularly known as the Fodder Scam, Prasad had to resign as chief minister of Bihar.
After installing his wife Rabri Devi as the chief minister, Yadav had surrendered to a court in Patna on July 31, 1997.
Later, he came to Ranchi following a court order that Ranchi had the jurisdiction of the case. The Mecon Guest House was converted to a camp jail in Ranchi before he was shifted to the old Birsa Munda Jail at Circular road here.
After Jharkhand’s bifurcation on November 15, 2000, the litigations were brought before the Supreme Court whether the Patna High Court had the jurisdiction on the cases in this part of the undivided Bihar and trial was stayed till December 2000 to December 2001.
The SC had said in November, 2001 that trial would be conducted by special courts in Ranchi.
Trial in Ranchi began in March, 2002 by seven special courts. The case was posted for defence of Prasad from May 15 and Prasad’s counsel examined 29 witnesses in his defence.
But when the defence continued to skip dates, the court fixed July 15 to deliver the judgement and asked the accused to complete arguments by July 1.
Subsequently, Prasad moved the Supreme Court pleading shifting of his case from the court of Pravas Kumar Singh on the ground of political conspiracy, which the apex court struck down, paving the way for the first judgement against Prasad.
Master Takes
[box]
Dhruv Ganguly on Art
Johannes Vermeer’s Girl with a Pearl Earring has intrigued art lovers for centuries. The famous portrait is believed to tell the story of a young girl who worked as a maid. It is an intimate depiction of its subject in the photorealistic style. Her intensity of expression, moisture on the lips and clear play of chiaroscuro suggest a subtle playfulness that is instantly capturing. Her wide, enigmatic eyes are part of its allure. The Dutch painter used bright, lavish shades and the quality of his brushwork is such that it makes the painting a subject of baroque ages.
Ganguly is an illustrator and artist based in New Delhi
[/box]
Pavan K Varma on Books
The Power of Now by Eckhart Tolle combines a great deal of ‘Vedanta’ with Hindu metaphysics, but is put forward in an easy-to-comprehend manner. Tolle liberates you from tyranny of the past and worries of the future. He puts attention on the moment that is now, pushing aside the persuasion of sterile ambitions. Acknowledging this moment with gratitude is the only measure of success.
Varma is an author and a diplomat
[box]
Uday Kapur on Music
I’ve been exploring chillwave sounds and the one artist I keep coming back to is Toro y Moi aka Chazwick Bundick. His new LP, Anything in Return, has its roots in analog synth elements. Moi’s sounds have evolved over time, incorporating various influences. With tonnes of groove and a generous dose of synth pop melodies, these tunes are perfect for laidback house parties, metro rides and those times you re-enact The Perks of Being A Wallflower scenes.
Kapur produces music as Tanktop Jimmy
[/box]
Sourav Sarangi on Film
Quarter Number 4/11 is the directorial debut of Ranu Ghosh, a cameraperson working on documentaries. The film revolves around the life of Shambhu Prasad Singh, a man caught in trauma and anxiety after he loses his job as well as his home. Quarter Number 4/11 is a low angle, ground zero perspective on development, as seen by somebody who is being crushed under its weight. By following Prasad’s narrative, the film explores the injustice inherent in the fabric of the ‘successful’ city. This is a hauntingly true story.
Sarangi is a cinematographer and an award-winning filmmaker
[box]
Harish Bhardwaj on Food
Situated in a lush and shady corner of Lodhi Road, Delhi, Ploof Deli Kitchen is a cosy place with bright interiors and quirky pictures. The asparagus and smoked cheese rolls, prawns in Thai black pepper sauce and Vietnamese grilled chicken skewers make for a good start. One must not miss the seafood here. Flavoured with olive oil and a squeeze of lime, the grilled sea bass fillet and the seven seas risotto are delectable. You can also buy sundried tomatoes, ready-to-cook meat plates, olives, herbs, cheese and a lot of those little ingredients the lack of which usually derails your Italian culinary skills.
Bhardwaj is the owner of Mighty 8, Gurgaon
[/box]
‘I resisted writing lyrics for eight years because of my mental block’

Lyricist and Singer
How would you describe your evolution as a lyricist?
Growing up in Lucknow taught me the correct lehza, and having studied Hindi in school, I was in sync with the language. But there wasn’t a writer in me. I stumbled upon writing only in Bombay. I would make up lyrics to sing along with melodies. People repeatedly told me that the songs I wrote were good. But for eight years, I was reluctant and paid no heed to it. Some people write stories stemming from their personal instances, others write poetry but I can’t do it. Main sirf dhun pe gaane likhta hun. I can place myself in any situation and write a song in the most human way possible without having lived that moment.
Why use your pen name Indraneel?
In 1999, when I came to Bombay, there was a mindset that if you have come to Bollywood to become a singer, then stick to it. Don’t try your hand at composing or writing or acting. If you are a singer writing songs, it might create a rift with some big lyricist and you’ll stop getting work. This nonsense was very prevalent with old-school Bollywood. I really wanted to become a singer and did not want anything to be a hurdle. So I used a pen name ‘Indraneel’ until I wrote for Aamir.
Was it tough getting accepted as a lyricist and not a singer?
After eight years in Mumbai, I was still a nobody. I was spending from my pocket, recording my songs so that I could approach composers and make them listen to my tracks. I reached that point where one realises that as they are struggling to create one type of identity in the industry, another aspect of them is already opening up some avenues. But you resist those avenues because of a mental block, such as the one I had against my writing. I had to take a call to seriously pursue lyric-writing.
What role did Mumbai play in your life?
Being in Mumbai gave me an identity crisis, having to choose between singing and writing lyrics. Also, Mumbai is a busy place, full of opportunities, but with each passing day yahan life kam hoti jaa rahi hai. After you have had a great day at work, cracked an amazing song, you return to an empty apartment, then it hits you — what are accomplishments and success unless you have someone to share it with.













Tiny right-wing minority to blame for US govt shutdown
At the midnight of 30 September-1 October, US President Barack Obama’s administration went broke. Who is to blame for this catastrophe that can potentially derail not just America’s but the world economy, too? It is a small number of fiscal right-wingers that votes in internal elections of the Republican Party to choose candidates who challenge those of the Democratic Party in elections to the US Congress, the bicameral US legislature. And these Republican cadres now hold the US to ransom as elections to the 435-member House of Representatives, the lower house of the US Congress, are due in exactly 13 months.
The crisis stems from the refusal of the Republicans, who have a majority in the House, to approve Obama’s budget plan for the next year. They wanted Obama to first accept their amendments to his signature healthcare law of 2010, aka Obamacare, which goes into effect Tuesday. The Republicans hate it as it compels Americans to buy health insurance and forces governments to subsidise those who can’t. Obama binned their proposals which would have defunded and delayed Obamacare. In return, they junked his budget.
As was feared, this has caused a “shutdown” of the US government. Essential services such as air traffic control and airport security, the postal work, and social security payments under Medicaid and Medicare, America’s free healthcare for the poor and the elderly, would continue, as would the disbursement of the salaries to the defence personnel. But according to The New York Times, as many as 800,000 federal staff may be sent on leave. A million would be forced to work without pay during the shutdown.
Federal courts could sack staff if the standoff exceeds ten business days. Hearings could get delayed; new cases may not be taken up, creating a backlog. Elsewhere, loan approvals and disbursement could be delayed. Food and drug inspections would suffer. Federal hospitals would certainly turn away new patients. Most workplace safety inspections would stop. Additionally, many less urgent federally-paid pursuits, like federal zoos and museums, and major attractions such as the Statue of Liberty, would shut.
A shutdown of the US government is not an everyday occurrence and, if it persists, dangerously risks shattering the world economy. The last shutdown came 17 years ago when Bill Clinton was US President. It lasted 21 days, and cost $2 billion at that time. This shutdown is trickier as the US Congress must, by 15 October, raise the federal government’s debt limit so it can borrow more to pay its bills. If the highly polarised House doesn’t oblige Obama, his government would have no money to fulfill its past financial commitments, besides having no budget approval for the fiscal year that begins Tuesday. A government official has estimated it will have only $30 billion left by 17 October.
If this isn’t enough to trigger anger against the Republicans, Obamacare has repeatedly polled as a substantial favourite in the US. Many among those with uninsured health, who are 15 percent of America’s 30 million people, back the law as it would drastically lower their healthcare costs. Of course, the Republicans know that the negative publicity surrounding their refusal to pass the budget and their rabid opposition to Obamacare could repel voters. But they are victims of self-inflicted wounds. This is how they’ve done it.
Under US law, both chambers of the Congress must pass the government’s budget, unlike in India where the Lok Sabha, the lower house of Parliament, alone must. India’s government is drawn from the majority in the directly-elected Lok Sabha, so its budget passes easily. But unlike the Indian prime minister who is from Parliament, the US president’s office is statutorily outside the US Congress and has no agency to force a favorable vote in either legislative house unless his party has a majority in it. Even then, he can only cajole his party’s Congressmen and women and hope they will comply.
Obama’s budget has stalled as the Democrats hold a majority in only the Senate, the upper house, which has incidentally already passed his budget (with the Republicans, who are in a minority there, voting against, of course). But with the Republicans holding a majority in the House, the stalemate is now the classic presidential nightmare. On their part, the 230 House Republicans have little elbow space. At stake is their renomination as their party’s candidates for the election to the 435 House seats due in November 2014.
Unlike India’s Parliament whose upper house, the Rajya Sabha, is elected by state legislators, both houses of the US Congress are directly elected by its citizens. Senators keep six-year terms, with one-third seats up for election every two years. But the House is re-elected every two years, thus keeping its members politically vulnerable all the time.
The budget vote came at a time when House incumbents are six-to-eight months from their party’s internal elections, known as “primaries”, in their constituencies to qualify for the main contests. Though the Republicans are generally right-wing, the pressure to take ultra extreme positions is most on those looking to win a seat in the House. Many House Republicans would undoubtedly face stiff challenges from fellow Republicans to their right.
The House is akin to the Lok Sabha in that its members are elected by individual constituencies of roughly equally populations. The number of seats, therefore, vary across the states, with California having the most 53 seats and some states having only one each. In contrast, the US Senate has two members from each of the 50 American states, irrespective of their population sizes, elected by all voters in a state, for a total of 100.
Republicans looking to win primaries for the US Senate, in which party cadres across a given state vote, can afford a not-too-rightist aggregate position as the extremism of some would generally be somewhat offset by the lesser extremism of the other cadres. But many of those Republicans who seek their party’s nominations for the House need to heavily tack right to pander to the extremism of the party’s cadres that dominate their much smaller constituencies. For a number of House Republicans, therefore, now is not the time to think of the US government but of their upcoming primaries in their constituencies.
Another factor that has made a difficult situation worse for the Republicans is gerrymandering, the American word for constituency demarcation. Unlike in India where a statutorily autonomous Election Commission manages elections and also redraws constituencies, in the US the state legislatures hold that prerogative. Over the last few years, parties controlling various legislatures have manipulated constituency boundaries lumping neighbourhoods that vote them consistently, giving themselves political advantages at elections while creating constituencies of absurd shapes. But gerrymandering has become a double-edged sword for some House Republicans.
Greater confidence for a Republican victory in a gerrymandered constituency has emboldened the party’s red meat base to thrive in extremist positions in many states, especially in the largely rural and traditional parts of the Midwestern and southern US states. To win a primary among such voters many a Republican politician is pushed to the extreme right-wing. The House Republicans at the primaries must loudly proclaim their adherence to conservative America’s fundamental precepts of small government. Obamacare is their pet hate because it takes away the choice to not buy health insurance and, even worse, is built on the “socialist” principle of government subsidy.
Of course, the Republicans are only posturing to stress their credentials with their cadres. They know they have lost the battle on Obamacare. Mitt Romney, their candidate who fought Obama at last year’s presidential election, made it an issue and lost. This year, the US Supreme Court upheld the law to the Republicans’ dismay. Now that they have been heard loudly all over again, Americans — and indeed the rest of the world — should hope that, in Obama’s words last week, “one faction of one party, in one house of Congress, in one branch of government doesn’t get to shut down the entire government” for too long.