Nitish Kumar's historic triumph : How Bihar rewrote rules of electoral politics

Dipak Kurmi
Contd from previous issue
Yet, against these formidable odds, the NDA not only retained power but expanded its mandate significantly. This outcome demands a deeper examination of the factors that contributed to this historic victory and, equally importantly, the elements that failed to resonate with Bihar's electorate when deployed by the opposition.
At the heart of this victory lies the sustained credibility of Nitish Kumar himself, a politician who has transcended the usual constraints of caste arithmetic that define Bihar's politics. Coming from the Kurmi community, which constitutes merely 2.8 percent of Bihar's population, Kumar has demonstrated that in a state deeply stratified by caste identities, governance and targeted welfare can build a coalition that spans multiple social groups. This is no mean achievement in a political environment where caste has traditionally been the primary determinant of electoral outcomes.
What emerges from conversations with voters across Bihar is not anger towards Kumar but a complex mixture of gratitude tinged with aspirations for more. While there exists a palpable fatigue with his two-decade rule and a yearning among some sections for younger leadership, this sentiment has not translated into a desire to replace him. Instead, voters appear to have concluded that despite his shortcomings and the government's incomplete agenda, Kumar remains the safest bet to deliver on the state's developmental aspirations. This verdict places him in an exclusive club of Indian chief ministers who have governed for more than twenty years, alongside West Bengal's Jyoti Basu and Odisha's Naveen Patnaik, both of whom became synonymous with their states' political identity.
The strategic deployment of welfare schemes ahead of the elections played a crucial role in shaping voter sentiment. Drawing inspiration from the template established by governments in Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand, and Maharashtra, all of which faced significant anti-incumbency pressures, the Kumar administration rolled out an ambitious array of schemes targeting women, the elderly, and the rural poor. These were not modest interventions but substantial commitments that demonstrated the government's willingness to invest heavily in direct transfers and subsidies.
The centrepiece of this welfare offensive was the enterprise scheme for women, under which the Bihar government transferred Rs 10,000 into the accounts of 1.21 crore women just over a month before the polls commenced. The timing was impeccable, and the impact immediate. A second instalment followed on November 7, right in the middle of the election campaign, reinforcing the message that this was a government that delivered on its promises. Complementing this were the free electricity scheme providing up to 125 units at no cost and the enhanced elderly pension, which jumped from a meagre Rs 400 to Rs 1,100 per month.
The financial commitment underlying these schemes was staggering. The Bihar government spent over Rs 20,000 crores on these newly introduced welfare measures in the period leading up to the polls. When measured against the state's revenue collection capacity, this represented the most aggressive welfare spending by any state government ahead of elections in the country. It constituted 7.5 percent of Bihar's total tax revenue and an astonishing 32.5 percent of its own tax revenue, underscoring the political calculation that such expenditure would yield electoral dividends.
On the ground, the impact of these schemes was undeniable. Women voters, the elderly, and rural poor communities expressed a sense of obligation towards the government that had made them beneficiaries of its largesse. In village after village, this newspaper encountered voters who explicitly acknowledged that these schemes had influenced their voting decision, creating a direct transaction between welfare delivery and electoral support.
The Opposition, particularly the RJD led by Tejashwi Yadav, found itself in an awkward position. In a clever piece of political theatre, the RJD released an artificial intelligence-generated cartoon depicting Nitish Kumar copying from Tejashwi's examination notes, a visual metaphor for what the party claimed was intellectual theft. Tejashwi accused Kumar of stealing his ideas, pointing out that it was he who had first promised Rs 2,500 monthly payments to women, he who had highlighted the inadequacy of elderly pen- sions, and he who had campaigned against rising elec- tricity bills in rural areas.
These claims were factually accurate. The Maha- gathbandhan had indeed built its electoral strategy around these promises, anticipating that they would swing voters towards the opposition. However, the Kumar government's pre-emptive implementation of similar schemes fundamentally altered the political calculus. The Bihar polls effectively became a contest between promises and delivery, between the uncertain future offered by the opposition and the tangible benefits already being received from the incumbent government. Faced with this reality, the MGB attempted a desperate pivot, belatedly announcing that it would provide a government job to every household if elected. This promise was so ambitious and implausible that even core RJD supporters from the Yadav community expressed scepticism about its feasibility.
The Congress party's attempts to galvanise support through its Vote Adhikar Yatra, featuring Rahul Gandhi alongside Tejashwi Yadav on a whirlwind tour of the State, failed to gain traction. Gandhi's allegations of "vote chori" or vote theft found few believers, even among Muslim voters who traditionally support the Opposition alliance.
(To be contd)