The financial health of the Madhya Pradesh Congress continues to deteriorate, exposing deep-rooted structural flaws that have long plagued the party’s state unit. As it grapples with persistent fund shortages, organisational fragility, and leadership-centered politics, the once-dominant political force now appears to be struggling to maintain even basic functionality.
A significant indicator of the party’s dwindling resources is its inability to sustain district-level operations. During Kamal Nath’s tenure as Chief Minister (2018–2020), an attempt was made to institutionalise a funding mechanism by encouraging Congress MLAs and MPs to donate a month’s salary towards strengthening party infrastructure. However, the initiative floundered due to a lack of compliance and enthusiasm from within the party ranks. The inability to enforce even such modest contributions revealed the fragility of internal discipline and the absence of a culture of collective responsibility.
The crisis runs deeper than just fundraising failures. In many districts, the Congress lacks even a functional party office. Nearly 50% of district units operate without owning any premises, often relying on rented accommodations or makeshift arrangements. Alarmingly, party insiders admit that appointments to the post of District Congress Committee (DCC) presidents are frequently influenced by the candidate’s financial capacity, rather than organisational merit or grassroots connect. This practice has hollowed out the cadre base, replacing committed workers with figureheads propped up by wealth.
Compounding this institutional decay is the tendency of influential leaders to prioritise personal fiefdoms over party cohesion.
There have been multiple cases where senior leaders have unofficially occupied or taken control of party assets in districts—assets that, in the absence of a centralised property inventory or regulatory oversight, remain vulnerable to misuse and appropriation. In a recent meeting of DCC presidents in New Delhi, the lack of basic infrastructure and financial support emerged as a key concern. Responding to the discontent, Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge announced the formation of a national committee under Vijay Inder Singhla to conduct a comprehensive listing and valuation of Congress properties across India. However, party insiders remain skeptical, pointing out that similar efforts launched over the past four years have failed to gain momentum.
Unlike the BJP—which continues to run disciplined and consistent donation drives regardless of whether it is in power or opposition—the Congress lacks a systematic donation-seeking apparatus. The Bharatiya Janata Party’s “Sammaan Nidhi” and other grassroots-level fund mobilisation campaigns have created a sustainable pipeline of contributions that fuel its organisational machinery even in challenging times. The Congress, by contrast, continues to rely heavily on individual largesse. In Madhya Pradesh, much of the financial burden has historically been shouldered by state presidents. Kamal Nath, during his term, personally funded most party activities. His successor, current PCC chief Jitu Patwari, is reportedly doing the same—funding events, outreach, and mobilisation drives from his own pocket. The sole consistent revenue stream at the state level remains the rent accrued from Jawahar Bhawan, the old Pradesh Congress Committee (PCC) headquarters. Beyond this, the coffers are alarmingly bare. Rajiv Singh, MPCC General Secretary, acknowledged that although there have been repeated efforts by the AICC to initiate a property audit and streamline asset utilisation, the process has stagnated due to bureaucratic inertia and internal politics.
The Congress’ financial woes in Madhya Pradesh are not merely a question of economics—they reflect deeper institutional decay. In the absence of a transparent and sustainable model for political financing, the party risks becoming a hollow shell: top-heavy, resource-starved, and increasingly dependent on a shrinking pool of individual benefactors.
