Voters reward economic performance in assembly elections
Here's why two incumbent governments in Tamil Nadu and West Bengal were re-elected, while the parties that ruled Assam and Kerala thrown out
In the recent elections, why were two incumbent governments in Tamil Nadu and West Bengal re-elected, while the parties that ruled Assam and Kerala thrown out? There are, of course, many different reasons and the elements that shaped victories and defeats will vary widely from state to state. But there is one common factor—the governments that were able to show improved economic growth were re-elected, while the ones that didn’t perform were rejected. To be specific, the states that showed a higher rate of economic growth than the national average saw their governments being re-elected, while the states with lower-than-average growth saw their rulers toppled.
This may very well be a coincidence, especially given the well-known issues with the state gross domestic product (GDP) data. But if we also take into account Nitish Kumar’s track record of growth in Bihar, which contributed to his re-election, voters seem to be rewarding economic performance and punishing non-performance. Certainly, there are many other contributing factors, such as the sops given by J. Jayalalithaa and Mamata Banerjee, or voting along communal lines in Assam. But economic considerations seem to be playing an increasingly important part in shaping voter preferences.
Consider the data. Assam’s GDP at constant prices (in the new series with base year 2011-12) had a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 3.1% between 2011-12 and 2014-15. Over the same period, India’s GDP grew at a CAGR of 6.5%. Kerala’s CAGR during these years was also lower than the national average, at 5.9%. So the two states in which the ruling parties bit the dust had growth rates lower than the national average.
In sharp contrast, Tamil Nadu’s performance during the period was exceptional, with its state GDP at constant prices growing at a CAGR of 7.8%. West Bengal hasn’t submitted its GDP according to the new series, so we have to consider its performance in terms of the old series with 2004-05 as base year. By this yardstick, its growth rate at constant prices was 4.7% in 2011-12, 7.5% in 2012-13, 6.9% in 2013-14 and 7.2% in 2014-15. Growth in 2011-12 was lower than the national rate, with the new government trying to find its feet, but it was comfortably higher than the national average in subsequent years. Note that all-India GDP growth according to the 2004-05 series was considerably lower than as per the 2011-12 series.
Man does not live by GDP growth alone, but the results of the recent elections suggest that economics is becoming the new politics. The winning formula for Jayalalithaa, Banerjee as well as Nitish has been using economic growth to distribute rich dividends to the voting masses.
Unlock a world of Benefits! From insightful newsletters to real-time stock tracking, breaking news and a personalized newsfeed – it's all here, just a click away! Login Now!