Published: 04:47 PM, 31 August 2026
Trump Impressed by India’s Voting System: Where Does the US Go Wrong?
Collected Image
The United States is one of the world’s oldest continuous democracies. For nearly two and a half centuries, the country has maintained a tradition of regular elections and peaceful transfers of power. Many democratic countries have also drawn lessons from various aspects of the American electoral system. Yet it is now the US President, Donald Trump, who has raised questions about certain features of his country’s electoral system while praising several aspects of India’s voting system, the world’s largest democracy.
Trump’s interest centres on voter verification, photo identification, proof of citizenship and the limited use of postal voting. Referring to the communication between India’s Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the US administration, Trump praised India’s electoral system on his social media platform, Truth Social. He noted that a large number of Indian voters have photo voter identification cards and that nearly 640 million voters participated in the 2024 Lok Sabha election. In his view, the United States should also learn from this experience.
This is why Trump has been pushing for the passage of the ‘SAVE America Act’. The proposed legislation seeks to require proof of citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections and specified forms of government-issued photo identification when casting a ballot. The bill passed the House of Representatives in 2025 but has not received final approval in the Senate.
This brings into focus a fundamental difference between the electoral systems of India and the United States. In India, a voter must be enrolled on the electoral roll to cast a ballot. The Electors Photo Identity Card, or EPIC, is an important means of verifying identity, but merely possessing an identity card does not entitle a person to vote. Inclusion on the electoral roll is the essential condition. India also has mechanisms for the regular updating and verification of electoral rolls.
The large-scale introduction of photo voter identification cards in India took place during the tenure of T. N. Seshan, who served as Chief Election Commissioner from 1990 to 1996. His tenure witnessed sweeping reforms in India’s electoral system. The introduction of photo identification cards to curb bogus voting and fraudulent voters was one of the most significant steps in those reforms. Photo electoral rolls were introduced subsequently. Today, the Election Commission of India’s voter-management system is one of the largest administrative exercises in the world.
Another issue that has attracted Trump’s attention is postal voting. While rules vary from state to state in the United States, access to mail-in or postal voting is relatively widespread. A large number of voters cast their ballots by mail in the 2024 presidential election. India, by contrast, does not offer such unrestricted access to ordinary voters. Postal ballots are available to specified categories of voters, including military and government personnel, election-duty personnel, those engaged in certain essential services, voters aged above 85 and specified categories of persons with disabilities.
Trump believes that the extensive use of postal voting in the United States can raise questions about electoral security and public confidence. He has therefore favoured limiting the facility, as in India, to specified categories of voters. However, the constitutional frameworks, administrative structures and voting cultures of India and the United States are fundamentally different. Whether India’s system can be replicated in the US is therefore a separate question.
Another important feature of India’s electoral system is the extensive use of Electronic Voting Machines, or EVMs. After their experimental use at a constituency in Kerala in 1982, EVMs were gradually expanded across the country. By the 2004 Lok Sabha election, EVMs were used in all constituencies. To enhance transparency in the voting process, the Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail, or VVPAT, was subsequently introduced.
When a voter presses the button for the preferred candidate on an EVM, a paper slip appears for a few seconds behind the transparent window of the VVPAT unit. It displays the candidate’s name, symbol and serial number. The slip then automatically drops into a sealed box. This allows the voter to see, at least immediately, that the vote has been recorded for the chosen candidate. Although EVMs and VVPATs remain politically contentious in India, the Election Commission has consistently emphasised their technological safeguards and multilayered verification mechanisms.
Bangladesh’s experience is also relevant in this context. The creation of a photo-based and biometric electoral roll in 2007-08 brought major changes to Bangladesh’s electoral system. National identity cards and, subsequently, smart national identity cards were introduced. These represented significant progress in voter identification. Bangladesh’s experience with EVMs, however, has been more limited and contentious than India’s. EVMs were used in six constituencies in the 2018 national parliamentary election. Subsequently, amid debates over their necessity, reliability and public acceptance, the use of EVMs did not expand further.
The question, therefore, is: Where does the United States go wrong?
To answer that, one must look at the fundamental structure of the American electoral system. A large part of election administration in the United States rests with state and local authorities. As a result, there are significant differences among states in voter registration, identity verification, early voting, postal voting and electoral rules. In India, by contrast, the central responsibility for conducting national and state-level elections rests with a constitutional body—the Election Commission of India.
The Election Commission of India is an independent constitutional institution. Managing nearly a billion voters across a vast territory, with immense linguistic and social diversity, within a broadly uniform electoral framework is a formidable administrative challenge. From preparing electoral rolls and verifying voter identities to managing polling stations, EVMs and VVPATs, conducting elections and declaring results, the Commission plays an extensive role at virtually every stage.
India’s achievement lies instead in having institutionalised, over several decades, the management of an enormous and highly complex electoral exercise. That is where the significance of Trump’s praise for India lies. If one of the world’s oldest democracies, the United States, is looking to the world’s largest democracy for lessons on voter verification, photo identification and limited postal voting, the development is certainly significant. It means identifying weaknesses in one’s own electoral system and learning from effective practices in other democracies.
A credible election does not depend solely on identity cards, EVMs or postal ballots. It requires accurate electoral rolls, voter registration that is simple yet secure, effective identity verification, an independent election-management institution, transparent vote counting, the confidence of political parties and, above all, public trust.
Thus, Trump’s praise of India is not merely an acknowledgement of India’s electoral capabilities; it also raises an important question about the structure of American elections: If one of the world’s oldest democracies wants to learn from another country’s voting system, where exactly does its own system fall short?
Perhaps the weakness does not lie in any single voting machine, identity card or postal ballot. It may instead lie in the challenge of making a highly decentralised system simultaneously secure, consistent, accessible and politically credible. India’s experience has at least demonstrated that, despite immense diversity and a vast electorate, it is possible to build strong institutions, maintain accurate electoral rolls and establish effective voter-verification mechanisms. That is why India’s electoral experience has now found a place in the political debate of a mature democracy such as the United States. (By, Delwar Hossain Journalist & the views expressed in this article are the author’s own.)
