The culture of offering freebies—such as free electricity, cash transfers, and loan waivers—has become a hallmark of electoral politics in India. While projected as welfare, these promises often represent populist strategies lacking long-term vision and raise concerns over economic sustainability and democratic ethics. Freebies are unconditional, non-targeted giveaways used to gain electoral mileage. In recent years, one of the most debated subjects is the freebie culture pursued by political parties in India. As politics become more competitive, political parties and their leaders seem to outdo each other with these electoral promises. Freebies such as foodgrains, transportation, water, electricity, electronics items, specific equipment, etc, are offered through political manifestos for wooing voters. Sometimes liquor and money are also added to the list. Indeed, as elections approach, political parties compete with each other for offering such freebies. Voters are majorly unaware of the risks lurking behind such ‘free’ offers. The momentary benefit is measured beyond the consequences. The wooing of voters becomes an ultimate target for most political parties.
The Election Commission has no major control over such manifestos as they have no expertise to evaluate the consequences of such freebies. Whenever complaints are raised about manifestos, the Election Commission issues some observations in a generic nature within the framework of the Constitution. Political parties agree on certain cosmetic corrections and then it is floated back into the public domain as a wooing stick. India’s freebie culture is moving towards economic disaster and the consequential damages will hit the economy sooner than later. The long and short impact of such a culture will disintegrate the economic ambitions of the country and kill people’s motivation to work. The government’s reservations about employment and education are based on constitutional provisions for the uplift of the socially underprivileged. Article 39 (a) says that citizens have the right to an adequate means of livelihood. Article 36 (b) adds that material resources of the community are so distributed as best to subserve the common good. There are clear directives to overcome economic inequality. Article 38 secures social order for the promotion of the welfare of the people. However, our political parties offer unilateral offers irrespective of the social or economic condition of the people. India needs to be extremely careful about the intent and the outcome. Sri Lanka’s economic crises taught us a lesson: that a revenue deficit crisis may lead to an economic collapse. Regional parties have a bigger role to play. As per an RBI report on fiscal deficit, the highly stressed states are Bihar, Kerala, Punjab, Rajasthan, and West Bengal. In a force majeure scenario like a pandemic, free foodgrain and vaccination drives at the mass level help. But in a normal economic cycle, the freebie must be allocated to the needy alone.
Freebies — free electricity, ration, bus rides, or even kitchen appliances — have become a staple of Indian politics and governance. But are these "gifts" empowering the poor, or slowly weakening our economic backbone? Freebies are goods or services offered at zero cost, primarily to win electoral support or address social inequalities. Examples include free laptops, bus travel, monthly cash doles, LPG connections, and health insurance. The purpose is either welfare support or political appeasement. The line between supportive governance and populist giveaways is getting thinner. India is a sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic republic. But when freebies are misused, they undermine both fiscal sustainability and citizen dignity. "True welfare empowers. Misused welfare enslaves." Not all freebies are wasteful.
The politics of freebies in India has evolved into an intense competition among political parties, transcending regional boundaries and becoming a pan-India phenomenon. While the trend initially gained momentum in the southern states of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, where successive governments indulged in populist schemes, today, no state remains an exception. From Maharashtra’s 2024 Assembly elections to the upcoming 2025 Delhi polls and even the 2024 general elections, political parties across the spectrum have engaged in extravagant promises, often at the cost of long-term economic sustainability. The practice of distributing freebies, ranging from cash handouts and free electricity to household appliances and unemployment allowances, has become a key electoral strategy. In Maharashtra’s 2024 elections, various parties pledged free ration schemes, loan waiver, subsidised gas cylinders, and even direct cash transfers, setting a precedent for competitive populism.
With the increasing rift and race between the political parties in pursuit of winning the elections, the rationale behind promising freebies is taking a big toll on the Indian economy. Freebie culture is not new to the Indian society but the extent to which it is spreading its reach is something very petrifying for the fiscal health of the country if not looked at in the coming future. Freebie indeed is a myth since someone has to bear the cost of providing it, the benefits availed by one section will be the increased cost borne by any other section of the society. According to the experts conducting research on this culture, this policy in the long run is economically unsustainable. With the inflation rate already ranging at 7.5%, the impact of the freebies in long run will further increase the cost of other goods and hence will drag the common people into the spiral of high payments and debt burden for the state government. The share of subsidies and freebies as a percentage of GDP is alarmingly high for almost all the states. The farm loan waivers further deteriorated the fiscal health of the states. As per the National Bank For Agriculture And Rural Development (NABARD) report on Farm Loan Waivers, the schemes cost approximately Rs,10,000 crores and Rs.34,020 crore in Punjab and Maharashtra respectively.
It’s elections time, and hence every party is trying to offer freebies to attract voters. There is so much criticism on freebie politics. The term Freebies is not new; rather it is a prevalent culture in Indian politics. The political parties are always trying to outdo each other in luring the Indian voters with assorted freebies. From free water to free smartphones the Indian politicians promise everything to attract prospective voters in favour. This trend has gained more momentum in the recent times with the political parties being innovative in their offerings as the ‘traditional free water and electricity’ is no longer sufficient as election goodies. For instance in the recent elections in Telangana, calls were made to people to provide them a pick and drop facility along with food facility on the election day if they vote for the particular party. Another example would be Rajasthan’s CM Vasundhara Raje’s promise to provide subsidised smartphones to 10 million poor people in the state with free data for the first six months. In counter to this, Shivraj Singh Chouhan offered a smartphone to every student who joins a government college. In 2013, Mr. Subramaniam Balaji challenged the freebie culture in the SC, when the people of Tamil Nadu were offered TV sets, fans, mixer grinders and laptops by parties on winning 2006 and 2011 elections.
The ethical dimensions of the freebie culture raise significant questions about the integrity of the democratic process and the dignity of the voter. When political parties offer unconditional giveaways, they risk treating citizens as mere recipients of patronage rather than as active participants in a democratic society. This dynamic can erode the ethical foundation of governance, where the focus shifts from long-term development and capacity building to short-term electoral gains. The practice of distributing freebies can create a dependency that undermines the self-reliance and motivation of individuals. Instead of fostering an environment where citizens can earn their livelihood through dignified work, freebies may inadvertently promote a culture of reliance on state handouts. This raises ethical concerns about whether such policies truly serve the welfare of the people or merely secure political power. The ethical implications extend to the fairness of the electoral process. When parties compete by escalating the scale of freebies, it can create an uneven playing field where the quality of governance and policy ideas is overshadowed by the allure of immediate material benefits. Voters, often facing economic hardships, may feel compelled to support a party based on these promises, potentially overlooking other critical factors such as the party’s track record, ideological stance, or long-term vision for the country.
From an economic perspective, the freebie culture poses substantial risks to the fiscal health of both state and national economies. The provision of free goods and services requires significant financial resources, which are typically drawn from government revenues. When these expenditures are not matched by corresponding revenue generation or are not part of a sustainable fiscal plan, they can lead to increased budget deficits and public debt. The sources highlight that the share of subsidies and freebies as a percentage of GDP is alarmingly high in many states. This fiscal strain can limit the government's ability to invest in essential infrastructure, education, healthcare, and other public services that are crucial for long-term economic development. The economic unsustainability of freebies is further compounded by their potential impact on inflation. As noted, with inflation rates already high, the cost of providing freebies can contribute to further price increases, affecting the broader population and potentially exacerbating economic disparities. The burden of financing these schemes often falls on taxpayers or leads to increased borrowing, which can have long-term consequences for the economy's stability. The examples of farm loan waivers costing thousands of crores in states like Punjab and Maharashtra illustrate the magnitude of fiscal resources diverted to such schemes. These expenditures can crowd out productive investments and strain state finances, leading to a cycle of debt and economic stress.
The constitutional dimensions of the freebie culture revolve around the interpretation of the Directive Principles of State Policy and the overall framework of governance in India. The Constitution provides guidance on the distribution of resources and the promotion of welfare, but it also emphasizes the need for balanced and sustainable development. Articles such as 38 and 39(a) underscore the state's responsibility to secure a social order that promotes the welfare of the people and ensures that citizens have adequate means of livelihood. However, the implementation of these principles through unconditional freebies raises questions about whether such measures align with the constitutional vision of equitable and sustainable development. The judiciary has also played a role in examining the freebie culture. The challenge by Mr. Subramaniam Balaji in the Supreme Court highlights the legal and constitutional concerns associated with populist promises. The court's involvement indicates that the issue is not merely political but also touches upon the constitutional balance between welfare measures and fiscal responsibility. The Election Commission's limited authority over party manifestos further complicates the constitutional oversight of freebie promises. While the Commission can issue observations, its inability to enforce strict controls means that the regulation of such promises largely depends on the political parties themselves and the electorate's discernment. This gap in regulatory oversight calls for a re-examination of how electoral promises are evaluated and monitored within the constitutional framework.
The spread of freebie culture from southern states to a pan-India phenomenon indicates a shift in political strategy across regions. States like Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu were early adopters, using freebies as a key element of their electoral campaigns. This trend has now permeated to other regions, including Maharashtra, Delhi, and various northern states, where parties have incorporated similar promises into their manifestos. The competitive nature of this trend means that parties feel compelled to match or exceed the offers of their rivals, leading to an escalation in the scale and scope of freebies. This regional spread has economic implications as well. Different states have varying fiscal capacities, and what might be sustainable for one state could be disastrous for another. The RBI report mentioned in the sources identifies states like Bihar, Kerala, Punjab, Rajasthan, and West Bengal as highly stressed in terms of fiscal deficit. For these states, adding the burden of extensive freebie schemes could push their economies closer to crisis, similar to the situation observed in Sri Lanka. The regional variation also affects the social fabric. In some regions, freebies might be targeted to address specific local issues or historical inequalities, while in others, they may be more broadly applied without adequate targeting. This lack of uniformity in approach can lead to disparities in how different populations experience the impact of these policies.
The social consequences of the freebie culture are multifaceted. On one hand, freebies can provide immediate relief to those in dire need, especially during economic downturns or crises like the pandemic. The provision of free foodgrain and vaccinations during such times is seen as a necessary welfare measure. On the other hand, in normal economic cycles, the widespread distribution of freebies can have adverse effects. It may create a perception that government support is a permanent entitlement rather than a temporary aid, potentially reducing the incentive for individuals to seek employment or improve their skills. The social impact also extends to how communities perceive governance and development. When political campaigns focus heavily on freebies, it can shift public discourse away from substantive issues like education quality, healthcare access, and job creation. This can lead to a political culture where the ability to promise the most attractive freebies becomes the primary criterion for electoral success, rather than the quality of governance or policy innovation. Furthermore, the targeting of freebies often lacks precision. The sources mention that freebies are often non-targeted, meaning they are offered to broad segments of the population without distinguishing between those who genuinely need support and those who do not. This can result in inefficient use of public resources and may not effectively address the needs of the most vulnerable populations.
To address the challenges posed by the freebie culture, various solutions and recommendations have been proposed. One key area is the need for greater fiscal discipline and transparency in how government resources are allocated. This includes developing robust mechanisms to evaluate the long-term economic impact of populist schemes before they are included in manifestos. Enhancing the role of institutions like the Election Commission to provide more substantive oversight of electoral promises could also help. This might involve requiring parties to submit detailed cost-benefit analyses or fiscal impact assessments for their proposed freebies. Another approach is to promote targeted welfare programs that are means-tested and designed to reach the most needy sections of society. By focusing on targeted support rather than universal freebies, the government can ensure that resources are used efficiently and effectively. This aligns with the constitutional directive to overcome economic inequality and promote the welfare of the people. Public awareness and education are also crucial. Voters need to be informed about the potential long-term consequences of freebie promises so they can make more informed choices at the ballot box. Encouraging a political culture that values policy substance over populist giveaways can help shift the focus of electoral campaigns towards sustainable development and good governance. Finally, learning from past experiences and international examples, such as the economic crisis in Sri Lanka, can provide valuable lessons on the dangers of unchecked populist spending. These lessons can inform policy decisions and help steer the country towards a more balanced and sustainable approach to welfare and development.
In conclusion, the freebie culture in Indian politics represents a complex issue with significant ethical, economic, and constitutional implications. While it may offer short-term benefits to voters and help political parties secure electoral victories, the long-term consequences can be detrimental to the nation's fiscal health, social fabric, and democratic integrity. Addressing this challenge requires a multi-pronged approach involving institutional reforms, targeted welfare policies, public awareness, and a renewed commitment to sustainable and equitable development. By prioritizing the long-term well-being of the country over immediate electoral gains, India can navigate away from the perilous trap of freebie politics and towards a more prosperous and stable future.
Sources
- Q. Freebies, often promised by political parties, reflect a breakdown of welfare governance in India. Critically examine the ethical, economic, and constitutional dimensions of this trend. (350–400 words)
- Freebie culture a perilous trap for unsuspecting people, India’s economy
- Freebies in India: Boon or Bane? A balanced bargain
- The Freebies Competition In Indian Politics: A Deepening Crisis
- Freebies Culture – Inflating Economic and Social Adversities
- Freebies Politics in India