- DP Rigathi Gachagua ignited discussions on One Man One Vote One Shilling, prompting national discourse on equitable resource allocation.
- Raila Odinga expressed support for the proposed revenue formula, contrasting President William Ruto’s criticism of the concept as divisive.
- The One Man One Vote One Shilling principle advocates for equal financial support for each vote, reflecting each county’s population size.
- CRA oversees revenue allocation based on population size, poverty levels, land area, and fiscal responsibility, with counties set to receive Ksh.391.1 billion as an equitable share for the 2024/25 financial year.
The ongoing debate on the One Man One Vote One Shilling has spurred conversations around equitable distribution of national resources among the 47 counties.
The debate, initiated by Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua, has seen different leaders voice their opinions about the revenue-sharing formula.
Recently, former Prime Minister Raila Odinga expressed his support for the population-based revenue-sharing formula when he hosted the organizers of the Limuru III conference.
However, President Ruto has called the One Man One Vote One Shilling clarion call divisive, urging leaders to promote unity and shun divisive politics.
So, what does the One Man One Vote One Shilling mean?
The One Man One Vote One Shilling principle emphasizes that every individual’s vote should translate into equal financial support from the national government, reflecting the population size of each county.
The principle emerged as a strong perspective during debates on the third basis for revenue allocation. Proponents argue that population should be the primary factor in determining resource distribution to ensure that funds are allocated based on the number of people in each county.
This principle aims to reflect the demand for services and infrastructure the population requires.
Background on Kenya’s Revenue Sharing Formula
Kenya has 47 counties, and each of these counties depends on revenue allocation from the national government to finance development projects and recurrent expenditure.
The formula, overseen by the Commission on Revenue Allocation (CRA), considers factors such as population size, poverty levels, land area, and fiscal responsibility.
Counties are set to receive Ksh.391.1 billion as the equitable share of revenue for the 2024/25 financial year. Additional allocations to the counties total Sh.48.2 billion, with Sh.7.9 billion going to the Equalization Fund.
The current revenue allocation formula ensures that counties receive funds proportional to their needs and capacities to foster balanced development across the country.
Arguments in Favor of the One Man One Vote One Shilling Concept
Fair Representation
By tying resource distribution directly to the number of people in each county, this principle ensures that areas with larger populations receive a proportionate share of national funds.
This approach reflects the actual demand for services and infrastructure, ensuring that populous regions can adequately meet the needs of their residents. More populated counties will need more hospitals, clinics, and healthcare personnel to serve their larger populations.
Allocating resources based on population size ensures these counties receive sufficient funds to build and maintain necessary healthcare infrastructure. Additionally, counties with more children require more schools, teachers, and educational materials.
By distributing funds based on the number of residents, the principle ensures that educational facilities are scaled appropriately to serve the population.
Equity
The approach aims to address disparities by ensuring that counties with larger populations, often with greater service demands, are not underfunded.
The allocation based on population reinforces the democratic notion that every vote is equal, translating this equality into financial terms. It supports the idea that every citizen, regardless of where they live, should benefit equally from national resources.
Democratic Principles
The One Man One Vote One Shilling principle extends this idea to resource allocation, ensuring that each person’s needs are equally considered in government funding decisions.
By allocating resources based on population size, this principle ensures that counties with larger populations receive funds proportional to their number of residents. This mirrors the democratic idea that each person’s voice (or vote) should have equal influence in political and financial decisions.
When resources are allocated based on population size, politicians are more likely to focus on the needs of their constituents. This ensures that public services such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure are scaled to meet the demands of the population.
Arguments against the One Man One Vote One Shilling Principle
Regional Imbalances
While the One Man One Vote One Shilling promotes the idea of equal representation based on population size, it also faces significant criticism for potentially exacerbating regional imbalances.
Critics argue that this approach could deepen existing disparities between more populous and less populous regions, leading to uneven development and neglect of critical needs in certain areas.
Focusing on population size alone may lead to the neglect of counties like Turkana, Mandera, Wajir, Samburu, and Marsabit which are less populated but geographically extensive.
Large counties with small populations have vast areas that require extensive road networks, schools, hospitals, and other infrastructure. Allocating resources primarily based on population size could result in insufficient funding to cover these extensive infrastructural needs, leading to poor service delivery.
Development Needs
The population-centered principle may not adequately address the diverse development needs of various regions. This approach risks sidelining areas that require substantial investment to catch up with more developed regions.
Counties with limited infrastructure may need substantial initial investments to establish basic facilities such as roads, schools, hospitals, and water systems. A funding formula based solely on population size might not provide sufficient resources for these critical developments.
Development needs also include efforts to stimulate economic growth and alleviate poverty. Regions with high poverty levels may require targeted interventions and substantial funding to support economic development programs and uplift their populations. They may need specific economic stimulus programs to attract investment, create jobs, and enhance local economies.
A population-centric funding approach might not allocate enough resources to effectively implement these programs.
Risk of Marginalization
Regions that have been historically marginalized might lag in various development indicators, including education, healthcare, and infrastructure. They need substantial funding to address these historical disparities and achieve parity with more developed regions.
Plus, ensuring that historically marginalized areas receive adequate resources is essential for promoting national equity and social justice. A funding model based primarily on population might fail to solve historical imbalances and perpetuate existing inequalities.
Previous Debates
The debate around the “One Man One Vote” call in Kenya’s revenue-sharing formula is often contentious and has been there before.
The One Man One Vote One Shilling principal featured prominently in the failed BBI report. The recommended formula sparked significant debate, as it proposed a shift in the revenue-sharing formula to allocate funds strictly according to population size, potentially disadvantaging less populated counties and raising concerns about increasing regional inequalities.
During the third basis debate for revenue allocation by the CRA, a compromise was reached to balance population size with other factors, ensuring that less populous counties still receive necessary funds for development while more populous counties get adequate resources to serve their larger populations.
Conclusion
While the proponents of the population-based formula argue that it ensures equal representation and addresses the needs of densely populated areas, critics highlight the potential for exacerbating regional disparities and neglecting the unique development needs of less populated but geographically extensive regions.
The debate surrounding this revenue allocation formula shows the complexity of balancing population size with other critical factors such as infrastructure needs, historical marginalization, and economic development in a growing middle-income country like Kenya.
Whether resources are allocated based on the One Man One Vote One Shilling principle or alternative approaches like the One Man One Kilometer One Shilling principle, there is a need to engage in thoughtful analysis and national dialogue to pick a formula that reflects the aspirations of all Kenyans and promotes national cohesion.