In Focus: Promises are now more Targeted, but are they more Effective?
Indian elections have been shaped by poll promises for decades. However, the nature of those promises is undergoing a visible transformation. The ongoing 2026 assembly elections across states such as Kerala, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, and Assam offer a useful snapshot of this shift. What was once dismissed as “freebie politics” is now evolving into something more structured, more targeted, and arguably more sophisticated. Political parties are no longer relying solely on broad, populist giveaways. Instead, they are crafting layered promises that combine direct cash transfers, welfare guarantees, employment commitments, and infrastructure projects into a coherent electoral strategy.
At one level, the scale of welfare-linked promises has expanded significantly. Estimates suggest that spending on such measures has risen sharply in recent years, reaching substantial proportions of state budgets and reflecting the centrality of welfare in electoral politics. Recent reporting indicates that governments often announce welfare schemes in the run-up to elections and ensure that benefits are disbursed closer to polling dates, aligning policy delivery with electoral timelines. This trend is reinforced by fiscal data showing a rise in state expenditure during election cycles, suggesting a growing convergence between governance decisions and campaign strategy. This trend underscores a deeper shift: welfare is no longer episodic or symbolic; it is continuous, embedded within governance, and strategically timed.
The Rise of DBTs
A defining feature of this transformation is the rise of direct benefit transfers as a core political instrument. In Assam, for instance, the government transferred thousands of crores to millions of women beneficiaries under an existing welfare scheme in the run-up to elections, reinforcing both economic support and political messaging. At the same time, in Tamil Nadu, parties have proposed recurring monthly cash assistance for women, reframing income support as economic empowerment rather than a one-time subsidy. These developments reflect a broader shift away from in-kind benefits toward cash-based transfers that are easier to deliver, more flexible for recipients, and more immediately visible in their impact. Unlike large infrastructure projects, which often take years to materialise, direct transfers create a tangible and recurring connection between the state and the voter.
Perhaps the most striking dimension of contemporary election promises is the centrality of women as a political constituency. Across multiple states, women-focused schemes have moved from the margins to the centre of campaign strategies. In Kerala, campaign narratives include welfare measures such as subsidised or free cooking gas, which are positioned as interventions that directly improve household welfare. Political messaging in Assam has similarly emphasised schemes aimed at strengthening women’s financial independence. This is not incidental. Higher voter turnout among women in recent elections, combined with the multiplier effect of benefits delivered at the household level, has made women a decisive electoral bloc. As a result, welfare politics in India are increasingly gendered by design.
From Job Creation to Job Guarantees
Alongside welfare, employment has re-emerged as a central electoral issue, but in a more quantified and targeted form. Rather than relying on broad promises of job creation, political parties are increasingly offering specific commitments tied to numbers and timelines. In Assam, for example, the ruling party has promised to create over 2 lakh government jobs and offer support to a significantly larger pool of entrepreneurs. At the national level, legislative efforts such as the Viksit Bharat–Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Act, 2025 have expanded the framework of employment guarantees, signalling a move toward institutionalised livelihood support. These developments suggest that the boundary between welfare and economic policy is becoming increasingly blurred. Income support, employment guarantees, and development initiatives are being woven together into a single narrative of economic security.
Infrastructure, meanwhile, has not disappeared from electoral discourse, but its role has been reframed. In Kerala, promises such as the development of high-speed rail and the establishment of institutions like AIIMS are being positioned as both long-term development goals and immediate signals of governance capability. In Tamil Nadu, manifestos continue to include commitments around housing, transport, and urban infrastructure. What has changed is the way these projects are communicated. Instead of being presented as abstract drivers of growth, infrastructure initiatives are increasingly framed in terms of their direct, localised impact on voters. The emphasis is on visibility, immediacy, and relevance to everyday life.
This evolution has also led to a more segmented approach to electoral promises. Modern manifestos are no longer broad policy documents; they resemble targeted frameworks designed to appeal to specific voter groups. Farmers are promised irrigation support and subsidies, youth are offered employment and entrepreneurship opportunities, women receive direct financial assistance, and senior citizens are assured enhanced social security. This segmentation reflects a more data-driven understanding of the electorate, while intensifying political competition. In effect, election promises are becoming micro-targeted policy instruments aimed at building and sustaining diverse voter coalitions.
Governance and Campaigning: A Blurred Line
The increasing sophistication also raises important concerns, however, about the relationship between governance and electoral politics. Reports suggest that governments often make announcements and disburse welfare schemes in ways that maximise electoral impact while remaining within the technical boundaries of the Model Code of Conduct. This creates a system which forces policy decisions to align closely with electoral cycles, undermining the distinction between public welfare and political strategy. The issue is not merely procedural; it has implications for fiscal discipline, institutional credibility, and the long-term orientation of governance. It is also important to recognise that “freebies” have not disappeared. They have, instead, been reframed. Cash transfers, subsidies, and free services continue to be central to electoral competition, particularly in states with a strong tradition of welfare politics.
What has changed is the language used to describe them. Freebies are now presented as welfare rights, subsidies as social guarantees, and handouts as tools of empowerment. This shift in framing makes such policies more politically acceptable and more difficult to critique, even as debates around their fiscal sustainability continue. The transformation of election promises is closely linked to broader structural changes in India’s political economy. The expansion of digital infrastructure has made it easier to deliver targeted benefits at scale, enabling governments to design more precise welfare schemes.
At the same time, increasing competition between states has led to a form of fiscal rivalry, as governments seek to outdo each other in offering attractive welfare packages. Voter expectations have also evolved, given that there is a growing demand for tangible, measurable outcomes that directly affect livelihoods, pushing political parties to move beyond abstract rhetoric toward concrete commitments. Yet, the question of effectiveness remains unresolved. In the short term, targeted promises, particularly direct benefit transfers, are highly effective. They deliver immediate relief, create visible impact, and generate strong political returns. In the long term, however, their impact is less clear. Concerns persist about the fiscal burden on state governments, the potential for creating dependency, and the limited contribution of such measures to structural economic transformation. The challenge lies in balancing immediate welfare needs with long-term development objectives.
India’s election promises are not becoming less important; they are becoming more complex. The shift from broad populism to targeted guarantees reflects a deeper transformation in how politics is practised and how voters are engaged. Whether this transformation leads to better governance or simply more refined electoral strategies will depend on how these promises are implemented and sustained beyond the election cycle. As India continues to navigate an era of competitive federalism and increasingly sophisticated political communication, election promises will remain at the heart of democratic contestation. The real test will not be in how effectively they win elections, but in how meaningfully they shape outcomes for the citizens they are designed to serve.
Top Stories of the Week
Amaravati Declared Sole Capital of Andhra Pradesh
The Lok Sabha has passed the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill 2026, declaring Amaravati as the sole capital of Andhra Pradesh and bringing closure to a prolonged period of uncertainty. The move follows the endh5gr66y6t of Hyderabad as a joint capital in 2024, necessitating a clearly designated administrative centre. It is expected to provide institutional clarity and support the resumption of stalled development activity.
The issue originates in the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act 2014, which created Telangana but did not designate a permanent capital for Andhra Pradesh. In 2015, the government led by N. Chandrababu Naidu selected Amaravati and initiated its development through a large-scale land pooling model. In 2019, the government under Y. S. Jagan Mohan Reddy altered this approach by proposing a three-capital framework: Visakhapatnam (executive), Amaravati (legislative), and Kurnool (judicial), which led to widespread protests and legal challenges. In 2022, the Andhra Pradesh High Court directed the state to continue developing Amaravati in line with prior commitments. By amending the parent legislation, Parliament has now formally anchored the capital designation in law, providing a clearer basis for administrative planning, resource allocation, and long-term infrastructure development.
Play Hard, Get Hired: Telangana’s New Game Plan
The Telangana government has introduced a progressive policy to provide government jobs to sportspersons who excel in their respective disciplines. The initiative seeks to create a secure career pathway for athletes, ensuring that sporting excellence is rewarded beyond medals and recognition.
The policy includes financial incentives, reinforcing the state’s commitment to nurturing talent and encouraging youth participation in sports. By integrating employment opportunities with athletic achievement, the aim is to address students’ concerns about balancing academics and sports careers. Additionally, the initiative aligns with a broader vision to promote sports culture and improve athlete welfare. Overall, the policy is designed to build a sustainable sports ecosystem while tackling social challenges such as rising substance abuse among students by promoting constructive engagement through sports. Telangana aims to emerge as a competitive sporting hub at national and international levels.
A Few Good Reads
Anand Kochukudy argues that the Communist Party of India (Marxist) in Kerala may need an electoral defeat under Pinarayi Vijayan to reset, introspect, and reclaim its ideological core.
Arunabha Ghosh and Vaibhav Chaturvedi argue that India’s updated NDC signals steady climate ambition, balancing energy security with long-term green transition despite global geopolitical disruptions.
Sunanda K. Datta-Ray calls for stronger reforms to protect Indian workers abroad, highlighting persistent exploitation, weak oversight, and the need for fair recruitment and labour rights frameworks.
Marton Gellert argues that a Péter Magyar victory over Viktor Orbán could soften Hungary’s stance toward the EU and Ukraine, though policy shifts would remain gradual and pragmatic.
Vikas Swarup warns that the escalating conflict in West Asia and the disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz risk triggering a global supply-chain and energy crisis, amid alarming diplomatic inaction.