When Jeb Bush first expressed a desire to run for the American presidency in 2016, his mother Barbara Bush sternly forbade him, saying: “We’ve had enough Bushes.” Barbara is wife of former president George H. W. Bush and mother of another former president, George W. Bush. But she quickly changed her mind, calling Jeb — her No. 2 son and former two-term governor of Florida — “the best qualified person in the country” to run for president in two years.

After Barbara’s volte-face, an opinion poll showed that nearly 50 per cent of Americans would definitely not back Jeb Bush for the top job. If he decides to have a go anyway, it could be a Clinton vs. Bush replay — Hillary Rodham Clinton vs Jeb Bush — throwing a spotlight on America’s power-hungry political dynasties, including the Kennedys.

Interestingly, even if Jeb refrains, it wouldn’t really come as a big surprise if his dapper 37-year-old son, George P. Bush — who recently won the Republican primary for the post of Texas land commissioner — runs for the presidency in 2024!

Like the US, India is fertile ground for hereditary politics. As the world’s largest democracy gears up for national elections, nepotism is on full display in every state as leaders across the political spectrum coolly foist their relatives on the public to keep the fruits of governance and power within the family.

The talk of the poll season is Congress Finance Minister P. Chidambaram bequeathing the Sivaganga seat in Tamil Nadu to his son, Karti. And BJP’s Yashwant Sinha, a former finance minister, is handing over his Hazaribagh seat to son Jayant on a platter, while Mamata Banerjee, West Bengal’s unmarried chief minister and Trinamool Congress president, has nominated her nephew and heir-apparent, Abhishek Banerjee, to fight the election from the scenic Diamond Harbour constituency. Gaurav Gogoi, son of Assam’s three times chief minister Tarun Gogoi, is also making his electoral debut. Clearly, politics is becoming a family business as never before.

In the current Lok Sabha, 145 out of 545 MPs belong to political dynasties. Patrick French, author of India: A Portrait, unearths a wealth of explosive information in his new dissertation for University of Pennsylvania’s Centre for Advanced Study of India. Example: Nine out of 10 Congress Party MPs have inherited his or her constituency. According to financial information furnished by MPs to the election watchdog, among 20 richest MPs, 15 are hereditary lawmakers with the Congress accounting for 10. Notably, MPs from political dynasties are on an average, five times richer than those who made it on their merit. Some MPs belonging to political dynasties are even richer than businessmen-turned-lawmakers.

Maharashtra, India’s richest state, faithfully mirrors the trend. More than a quarter of the state’s 48 sitting MPs —13 —have political lineage. They are children or relatives of political heavyweights. Among the lucky 13, six belong to Congress, five to Nationalist Congress Party while two are from Shiv Sena. Barring two, the rest have been renominated for the April-May elections.

But is hereditary politics really the bane of Indian democracy? And is the situation getting from bad to worse? Frankly, I don’t foresee an all out campaign against dynastic politics within democracy anytime soon. Nepotism is so well-entrenched and meekly accepted by the political class that no MP — even those who have made it on their own— loses his temper or sleep over it. Only Aam Aadmi Party has taken a principled stand; Arvind Kejriwal has solemnly pledged that “no two members of the same family will be eligible to contest elections in our party”.

The good news is that political heirs are not on the top of India’s power pyramid — with the sole exception of Rahul Gandhi, a fifth generation Nehru-Gandhi, and Sonia Gandhi who married into the First Family. Other hereditary MPs may be rolling in wealth but are certainly not A-listers or big daddies. Scions of dynasties do inherit a constituency and powers of political patronage which buy loyalty, but they are destined to play supporting roles. Not lead roles. French calls them Janissaries helping the real rulers to flourish.

In Modern Politics and Government, a contemporary classic from my Political Science Honours course at Calcutta’s St. Xavier’s College, Alan R. Ball defines power as the ability to influence the actions and decisions of others. That’s exactly what the likes of Manmohan Singh, Narendra Modi, Arvind Kejriwal, Sonia Gandhi, Mamata Banerjee, Mulayam Singh Yadav, Mayawati, Rajnath Singh, Rahul Gandhi, Jayalalitha and Nitish Kumar do all the time. But Gandhis apart, India’s most powerful have risen to preeminence by their blood, sweat and tears. They don’t belong to political families: they are first generation politicians. Some of them grew up in poverty. Today they have their hands on the levers of power but they once lived from hand to mouth. As a child, Modi — who appears to be the front-runner in the prime ministerial race — sold tea in clay cups at a railway station.

While hereditary politics sounds obnoxious and unacceptable in this day and age in a vibrant democracy where many millions are eligible to stand for office, its impact is not as bad as many make it out to be. As it is, there is no legal bar on an MP’s offspring throwing his or her hat into the electoral ring. He enjoys certain advantages which give him a head- start. But, invariably, he can’t reach the highest rung of power which is still the monopoly of self-made leaders of extraordinary calibre. The ‘Mummy-Daddy MP’ can become a colonel or brigadier but rarely the general or supreme commander, thank you.

S. N. M. Abdi is a noted Indian journalist and commentator.