Growth Must Be On The Election Agenda. Sops Are Anti People
History, insight, and a little observation tell us that economic growth is the most powerful instrument for scaling the socioeconomic pyramid. It is pivotal to poverty eradication and sustainable development. Growth triggers a virtuous circle of prosperity, catalyses a progressive ecosystem. It vitalises quality of life, social harmony, equality and opportunity.
Political class trade voters’ long term future for the next term
Voters expect the state to create the enabling ecosystem to grow the development pie for every individual to have her fill, making most people self-reliant, independent of the ephemeral largesse of the state. However, and instead, our political leaders especially in the election bound states conveniently divide the pie to the level where most eventually are denied.
Elections have a familiar plot. We are witnessing a spectacle where the leaders promise grand, deliver small. Unrealistic promises, irrational freebies, sops are on the rise.
The Indian electoral have been extremely judicious, rejecting the fringe, shunning those who plot power, manipulate voters. They instead embrace those who look ahead, present sustainable development plans. However this has changed in the last two decades.
A Crux study across 17 states highlights that about Rs.800 is sprinkled & ‘invested’ for every electoral vote. However less highlighted, even ignored is the larger malice i.e., electoral short-termism; election focused welfare schemes, and the ‘targeted’ freebies that the incumbent spends to lure the voters. The challengers respond with equal vengeance, tempting with taller promises, layering these promises with winnable slogans. Promises they can never keep.
But they promise, nevertheless.
Freebies & sops benefit only the individuals. Growth is the casualty
It’s a win for both the challengers and the incumbent. Most with ‘shrill & din’ and others with persuasive tone reap the benefits from those lofty, but broken promises. People’s memory is short. Most who do remember are forgiving. A large part of the poor electorates abdicate their responsibility for electoral sops.
The Crux study explains why most poor voters find it difficult to ‘reject’ the offers. Poverty often depletes, even breaks their will, despondency sets in, decision fatigue is common. For the deprived and the poor a rupee today is more than hundred rupees tomorrow.
Promise makers know they can ‘escape’ accountability. Most do. In a complex, often high pitched and shrill electoral milieu it is difficult for voters to untwine and disentangle who is, and at what level of government is responsible for which welfare scheme. The incumbent offers lazy solutions, spends recklessly. Sops and rag-tag welfare schemes are the currency to ‘buy’ votes. The challenger promises much more, ‘committed’ to sink the economy when (if) elected. It is dangerous.
The belief that politicians benefit electorally from freebies & sops strokes the fire. However there is more to it and needs redressal both at the individual level, (but more) at the system.
Politicians don’t look beyond a term
Politicians focus more on substantial (monetary) input & ‘quick’ outcome; less on impact, even less on sustainability. The priorities are misplaced; the economy suffers. Development is even more relevant to the poorest who have been deprived of the benefits of growth, denied most other basics.
Instead of focussing on creating infrastructure that benefits most, election bound governments ‘float’ sops. As an example, rural economy benefits more by creating sustainable and robust infrastructure, not loan waivers, which in any case benefits only the rich farmers. The fertiliser and power subsidies are another case in point. In Punjab, and several other states, subsidies are cornered by the larger farmers.
Most agricultural sops are at the cost of creating agricultural capital, or ‘taking the road to the village’. Agriculture infrastructure provides access markets, irrigation, making agricultural sustainable. Infrastructure is empowering.
Votes are the only assets poor can trade for growth & development
Similarly politicians eagerly build a hospital, (but) not invest in holistic health. Hospitals fetch votes. Investment in holistic health involves protracted, depressing details. And the votes lag. Focus on primary healthcare, Swachh Bharat can enhance health outcomes, reduce cost. Health &education are economic intangibles; create value; and a long term multiplier. Similarly skill development, ‘ease’ of doing business and other economic enablers are growth drivers, eventually job creators, accelerating social mobility.
Both the incumbent and their political challengers are reckless. They make promises that neither addresses real issues, nor meets fiscal norms. While one government showers marriage ‘gifts’, sarees, others dole out consumer products. Politicians blame the other party for not allowing it to ‘give’ more.
Parties are responsible; ecosystem must hold them accountable
Freebies do spur consumption, but the momentum is weak, spending intensity feeble and short lived; failing to trigger the virtuous growth cycle. Similarly, sops induced growth is low and shallow. On the other hand, investment led growth is balanced, equitable and a catalyst.
The Crux study concludes that the shrill voice of the spokesmen, persuasive tone of the politicians confuses the voters no end.
The election commission, the media and several election watchers must create a framework and a scorecard that ‘maps’ and matches the promises with the available resources and call the bluff. Voters must embrace those, whose development agenda includes education, infrastructure, jobs, equality and health. They must equally shun those who try to offer ‘sops for votes’.
Voters must understand & appreciate that balanced growth strengthens participatory democracy. Similarly a financially stronger state can grow the economy, enhance living conditions.
Voters are the key stockholders
The voters have a role to play as well. After all they are the owners of the resources and must not trade them for a bicycle or a grinder. Eventually freebies mean higher taxes, and several sacrifices that ultimately the common man ends up making. They must seek and demand investment that benefits them and the generations next.
People must reward those with courage of conviction to sustainable reforms, however unpopular. Similarly, the leaders must look beyond election, focus on building trust, and when in power exceed the expectations of the people.
This will strengthen participatory democracy.
