Bangkok: The tumultuous political landscape in Thailand is heating up as experts raise alarms over a phenomenon they are dubbing "political inflation." Candidates are reportedly spending exorbitant amounts, up to 7,500 baht, in vote-buying schemes, especially as the February 8, 2026, election day looms closer.
According to Thai News Agency, a scholar from Thammasat University suggests that the price of vote buying is reaching unprecedented levels, particularly in regions where candidates are switching political parties. This shift often requires significant financial incentives to maintain voter support, leading to what is being described as "political inflation." The scholar emphasizes that while Thai society has grown resistant to political manipulation, money remains a powerful tool for influencing voter behavior. The academic calls for a collective effort to render vote buying not only undesirable but also unprofitable for politicians.
Associate Professor Dr. Atthasit Phankeo, a political science lecturer at Thammasat University and author of "Power Distribution, Political Party Structure and Elections," provided insights into this growing issue. He posits that vote-buying rates in competitive areas could soar to as much as 7,500 baht per vote. This is particularly true for candidates who switch parties, as such moves often raise voter suspicions and damage the candidate's image, making financial incentives a costly but necessary strategy.
Dr. Atthasit explains that, from the candidates' perspective, financial expenditure creates a perceived obligation among voters, although it does not guarantee electoral success. The increase in vote-buying rates, compared to previous elections, is attributed to the influx of informal funds and the shifting allegiances of many MPs, former MPs, and members of influential and newly formed parties. This has led to a riskier political environment where candidates are willing to spend more to secure votes.
In regions with close previous election results or intense competition, candidates feel compelled to spend heavily to secure their positions, further driving up costs. Dr. Atthasit notes that this scenario results in "political inflation," where the money spent does not align with voters' daily incomes.
The Thammasat scholar also warns that the final cost of vote buying might exceed the current estimates, particularly in a competitive environment with inadequate regulatory protections. As parties with less financial backing gain momentum, wealthier parties may feel pressured to spend even more, believing that financial investment can translate into political power. Additionally, candidates trailing in the polls might cease their spending efforts, opting instead to conserve resources.
Dr. Atthasit reflects on the past two elections, noting that money has often trumped ethical campaigning. However, opinion polls indicate that many voters claim they will not support candidates who engage in vote buying. If this trend holds true, it could signify a shift towards valuing political ideas and policies over financial incentives. Yet, Dr. Atthasit cautions against complacency, warning that the current practices could lead to a cycle of corruption, where government projects are auctioned off to the highest bidder, perpetuating Thailand's economic struggles.
The scholar concludes by emphasizing that successful vote buying reflects a broader issue of immediate self-interest over long-term national progress. He calls for systemic reforms to address the weaknesses that enable such practices. Dr. Atthasit suggests that the Election Commission (EC) needs to adopt a more proactive approach, potentially increasing collaboration with entities like the Royal Thai Police and the Anti-Money Laundering Office to ensure fair elections.
In closing, Dr. Atthasit expresses hope for a future where vote buying is not just seen as unethical but is also rendered unprofitable. He urges Thai citizens to collaborate in strengthening democratic practices during the upcoming elections on February 8th.