01-23-2008, 02:20 AM
I totally agree with ramana. Unfortunately Telangana formation looks like a reality with no good leader in any parties of the state. If they make a guy from Telangana as CM of AP everything will subside and that is all it matters to stop this nuisance.
There will be demand by every district to have a seperate state. Every tribal with a population of 1000 or more is demanding a seperate state in NE and do we want the whole of India in the same situation?
Analyze what Chattisgargh or Jharkhand achieved after separation. Nothing other than either lawlessness or political instability. There should be no state less than 180 seats of assembly. Everytime BJP talks about smaller states they talk about Haryana and Himachal Pradesh as examples. Not all states can have the luxury of being river beds. This is a stupid comparison.
I believe UP is heart of India and dividing it in the name of governence is disastorous. By dividing the country into smaller states no one single state will have effect on the policies of central government. The lobbying by states worked very well in the development of country.
Let me give couple of examples. Every year the 2 MPs from Meghalaya request the railway minister to allocte rail development to their state. One time an MP even cried. The rail ministry never cares a two hoot because the state is not important politically. Can they do the same to UP?
Very recently when China intruded into Arunachal Pradesh, there was a protest by Arunachal MPs and no one really joined them in the parliament other than lip service.
If there are some regional imbalances, the states should adress them rather than dividing these states into smaller ones to create more instability.
Someone need to stop both BJP and congress from going into this disastorous path. If they want to bring stability at center they can increase the number of Loksabha seats to 800 based on latest census or divided the 800 equally between regions or by land area. There are many ways to solve the problem of hung Loksabha.
There will be demand by every district to have a seperate state. Every tribal with a population of 1000 or more is demanding a seperate state in NE and do we want the whole of India in the same situation?
Analyze what Chattisgargh or Jharkhand achieved after separation. Nothing other than either lawlessness or political instability. There should be no state less than 180 seats of assembly. Everytime BJP talks about smaller states they talk about Haryana and Himachal Pradesh as examples. Not all states can have the luxury of being river beds. This is a stupid comparison.
I believe UP is heart of India and dividing it in the name of governence is disastorous. By dividing the country into smaller states no one single state will have effect on the policies of central government. The lobbying by states worked very well in the development of country.
Let me give couple of examples. Every year the 2 MPs from Meghalaya request the railway minister to allocte rail development to their state. One time an MP even cried. The rail ministry never cares a two hoot because the state is not important politically. Can they do the same to UP?
Very recently when China intruded into Arunachal Pradesh, there was a protest by Arunachal MPs and no one really joined them in the parliament other than lip service.
If there are some regional imbalances, the states should adress them rather than dividing these states into smaller ones to create more instability.
Someone need to stop both BJP and congress from going into this disastorous path. If they want to bring stability at center they can increase the number of Loksabha seats to 800 based on latest census or divided the 800 equally between regions or by land area. There are many ways to solve the problem of hung Loksabha.