Analyzing the Debate Over Government-Provided Freebies and Welfare Schemes in India

The provision of government assistance to citizens is a complex and often contentious issue, particularly in a large, diverse nation like India. A significant portion of public discourse revolves around the distinction between welfare schemes designed to empower individuals and what critics label as "freebies" or "revdi" – direct cash or in-kind transfers with no requirement for participation or investment. This debate has intensified in recent years, involving political parties, the judiciary, and economists. Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his government have been central figures in this discussion, both criticizing certain opposition-led schemes and implementing their own forms of financial and material support. The conversation touches upon critical themes of economic policy, social security, electoral strategy, and the long-term impact on citizen self-reliance versus state dependence.

The "Revdi Culture" Controversy

The term "revdi culture" was popularized by Prime Minister Narendra Modi to criticize political parties, particularly the opposition, for what he termed irresponsible promises of freebies to garner votes. In a speech, he stated, "People endorsing this culture will never make new expressways for you, nor will they make new airports or defence corridors," arguing that such practices are detrimental to the country's development. This criticism reached the highest levels, with the issue being debated in the Supreme Court and the Election Commission weighing in, despite its limited jurisdiction on the matter. The core of the debate, as highlighted by various sources, is the fine line between welfare schemes and freebies, a distinction economists and policymakers struggle to define clearly, especially in a country with significant income disparity and a large population reliant on government support.

Government-Implemented Schemes: Empowerment vs. Direct Support

The Modi government's approach has been characterized by a mix of asset-creating welfare programs and direct financial or material transfers, leading to accusations of inconsistency from critics.

Asset-Creating Welfare Programs

In its first term (2014-2019), the government focused on initiatives aimed at improving the "ease of living" by creating assets in the hands of individuals or households. These included: - Swachh Bharat Mission: For building toilets. - Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY): For building houses. - Saubhagya Scheme: For providing electricity connections to every home. - Ujjwala Yojana: For providing LPG gas connections to households.

In the second term (2019-2024), the Jal Jeevan Mission (JJM) was launched to provide piped water connections to every home. However, reports indicate that in the third term, both PMAY and JJM are showing signs of implementation fatigue, and no new programs for improving ease of living have been initiated in the first financial year.

Direct Support and Cash Handouts

Conversely, the government has been scaling up direct support mechanisms, which are sometimes criticized as freebies.

Food Security: The government first provided additional 5 kg of rice/wheat per person to over 80 crore National Food Security Act (NFSA) beneficiaries during the COVID-19 pandemic. After this was withdrawn, the existing NFSA scheme—which charged subsidized rates for grains—was converted into a completely free-food scheme called Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Anna Yojana (PMGKAY). The extension of this free food grain scheme for the next five years was announced, a move critics point to as a contradiction of the earlier anti-freebie stance.
Direct Cash Transfers (FCHs):
- PM-KISAN: Launched near the end of the first term in the Interim Budget 2019-20, this scheme provides Rs 6,000 per year in cash handouts directly into the bank accounts of farmers. The first installment of Rs 2,000 for the 2018-19 period was disbursed before the Lok Sabha elections were announced. The scheme continues, providing support to approximately 10 crore farmers annually. Analysts have suggested the government may increase the quantum of funds transferred under this scheme by around 50% in future budgets.
- Fertilizer Subsidies: The government has maintained a substantial subsidy on fertilizers like urea. The selling price of urea has remained at Rs 242 per 45 kg bag since 2014, effectively making it a freebie for farmers.

The Empowerment Philosophy: Schemes Requiring Citizen Involvement

Union Minister Piyush Goyal has articulated a government philosophy that contrasts direct freebies with schemes designed to foster self-reliance. He stated that Prime Minister Modi believes in empowering people through schemes instead of offering freebies, emphasizing that "people should not be dependent on freebies given by the government, like free electricity for life without any involvement from the people."

Two specific schemes are frequently cited as examples of this empowerment-centric approach:

PM Surya Ghar Muft Bijli Yojana: This rooftop solar scheme aims to encourage individuals to generate their own electricity for domestic use and feed surpluses back into the grid. It is structured to involve personal investment alongside government support, embodying the concept of "skin in the game" – where citizens have personal involvement and commitment to the scheme's success. The goal is to cultivate a self-sufficient populace and reduce dependence on state-provided power.
PM KUSUM Yojana: This scheme also focuses on decentralized solar power generation, allowing farmers to generate electricity for personal and grid use. Like the Surya Ghar Yojana, it is designed to promote self-reliance and reduce dependence on the government.

Minister Goyal highlighted that these schemes were personally designed by Prime Minister Modi and reflect a vision of empowerment through personal participation rather than passive receipt of benefits.

Economic and Political Implications

The debate over freebies versus welfare schemes has significant economic and political ramifications. Critics argue that direct cash handouts and freebies can spoil people's work ethic and self-esteem, while proponents of welfare schemes point to the necessity of social security in a country with vast income inequality.

From a budgetary perspective, the government must balance the cost of these schemes. The Budget 2024 is expected to include measures like extending social security to domestic workers and potentially increasing the PM-KISAN payout. Economists have diverse opinions on what economic reforms the nation requires, and the government's choices in the budget reflect a continuous effort to navigate this complex landscape. The political boost from such schemes, as noted in analyses, can be significant, especially during election cycles.

Conclusion

The discourse surrounding government-provided benefits in India encapsulates a fundamental tension between immediate relief and long-term empowerment. The Modi government's strategy appears to be a hybrid model: it continues large-scale direct support programs like free food grains and fertilizer subsidies while simultaneously promoting asset-creating and self-reliance schemes like Surya Ghar and KUSUM. The "revdi culture" criticism highlights a rhetorical stance against what is seen as electoral populism, yet the government's own policies demonstrate the practical challenges of providing social security in a developing economy. The ultimate impact of these policies—whether they foster dependence or self-sufficiency—remains a subject of ongoing debate and analysis.