Why freebies alone don’t win elections in Bihar

THE Bihar election has provoked a debate over the rationale and extent to which the freebie culture can be used to win elections. Freebies are not new. The Aam Aadmi Party won over Delhiwallahs with free bus rides, along with subsidies for power and water supplies. Both the DMK and AIADMK have offered household goods like TVs, laptops and mobile phones during Assembly elections. Free power to farmers has been a staple incentive in many state polls. In other words, the relentless barrage of assurances made during the Bihar polls has a distinguished lineage, with many political parties offering such largesse.

There are larger questions linked to the so-called freebie culture. The first is whether the elections were won by the National Democratic Alliance merely due to the many promises it made or whether it was the impact of better governance by the incumbent government led by Nitish Kumar. And the second, more important, is the state of Bihar's economy, which is still languishing with the lowest per capita income in the country. Whether it rises will depend on the policies that are set in place in Kumar's tenth term as Chief Minister.

There is no doubt the decision to offer a one-time grant to women in cooperatives would have won the hearts of many. Yet, this was not a promise, it was an actual delivery by direct benefit transfer. If voters had truly been dissatisfied with the incumbent government's performance, it is doubtful whether the dole alone would have made a difference in the ultimate voting pattern. The reality is that women in Bihar have been relying on Nitish Kumar's policy measures to enable them to break free in many ways ever since he first assumed charge as CM in 2005.

From bicycles for girls, which enabled the most marginalised to reach schools, to liquor prohibition, which has been roundly criticised by all economic and political pundits, his policies have resonated with women. The creation of Jeevika Didis to form self-help groups and the establishment of women's groups to handle midday meals were other developments that have enabled an increasingly gender-friendly environment in the state.

As for economic growth, many might find it puzzling that the electorate opted for the same government despite the unrest over unemployment and massive migration to other states. The fact is, Bihar's economy has grown more rapidly over the past two decades than in the rest of the country. The extent of multidimensional poverty has crashed from 51 per cent in 2015 to 34 per cent currently. The overall growth rate has been higher than the national average for several years. In 2024-25, the growth rate was 8.6 per cent at constant prices, making it the sixth fastest growing in the country.

The problem is the growth has been on a low base. In the Lalu Prasad years prior to Kumar's entry, there was a flight of business and industry from the state to more friendly environs. The phrase "jungle raj" emanates from that era. In addition, the division of the state in 2000 led to the exit of resource-rich regions to the newly created state of Jharkhand.

A combination of factors resulted in Bihar slipping backward on key economic parameters. Thus, even the relatively faster pace of growth in recent years has meant the state continues to lag behind the rest of the country. The improvement in the law and order situation as well as rising investments in key infrastructure sectors of roads and power brought about visible improvements in ease of living. Schools, which had turned into police stations in Naxal-hit areas, were brought back as educational institutions. Industrial development, on the other hand, has been slow. Yet, for the first time, industry emerged as a larger contributor to the state's gross state domestic product (GSDP) than agriculture. GSDP is the equivalent of gross domestic product but at the state level.

Despite these positives, the issue of unemployment continues to loom large as the bulk of the youth are migrating to other parts of the country. One argument is that this boosts remittances and has raised the standard of living for the families back home. It is difficult to support this thesis as such inflows may be large in aggregate terms but are relatively low at the micro level. They may raise the standard of living marginally, but there is little evidence that this has brought about wealth creation. These cannot be compared to the flood of funds from West Asia that have transformed Kerala. The new regime thus has to create job opportunities by luring investments from an industry that had once fled the state. It is difficult but not impossible as electricity and roads have been upgraded significantly.

The government also has to tackle the financial burden imposed by election promises. Apart from the grant to women, these include free power, a higher social pension, a grant to construction workers and a stipend for students. By some estimates, these will cost an enormous Rs 33,000 crore for a state that is already burdened with heavy debt. The state's fiscal deficit was already at 6% of the GSDP in 2024-25, having exceeded the target of 3%.

The challenge before Nitish Kumar is to meet the aspirations of those who still repose faith in his ability to govern well. His government will have to shift focus to jobs in a state that contributes the least to the country's GDP at 4.3 per cent while poverty levels remain higher than in other states. Sushasan Babu (good governance man), as he is called, has a long road ahead to bring Bihar into the mainstream of India's developmental story.