Income boost good but will it win Cong votes?

Maqsood Maniyar | NT

Bengaluru: Social scientists approve of the idea of Universal Basic Income (UBI) which the Karnataka government’s guarantees seek to promote but expressed doubts whether they would translate into votes in the upcoming Lok Sabha elections.

Siddaramaiah however pushed back against the idea that the five guarantees were an “election gimmick”, adding that the idea was to ease the burden of the poor by providing them Rs 50,000 to Rs 55,000 yearly.

As much as Rs 52,000 crore has been set aside for the guarantees in 2024-25.

The five guarantees are Anna Bhagya (free rice), Gruha Jyoti (free power under 200 units), Gruha Lakshmi (Rs 2,000 monthly for ‘woman head of household’), Shakti (free bus travel for women) and Yuva Nidhi (Rs 3,000 monthly allowance for unemployed graduates and Rs 1,500 for diploma holders between jobs, from the 2022-23 academic year).

Economic professor at the Institute for Social and Economic Change (ISEC) Krishnaraj said that people should be more accepting of the guarantees since they were economic incentives and not just doles.

He added that resentment toward the poor for availing of welfare schemes betrayed a lack of fraternity, which is a goal of the Constitution.

“With this Budget, Siddaramaiah is trying to build an inclusive society. The goal is to ensure that the fruits of development reach everyone,” Krishnaraj said.

Identity trumped welfare in past: Prof

Political Science professor at Mysore University Muzaffar Assadi echoed the same sentiment but was skeptical of the schemes translating to votes.

He pointed out that historically, in the state, beneficiaries of land reform and Anna Bhagya had become the trusted vote bank of the BJP, especially in the coastal belt.

“The Congress government had brought in the Anna Bhagya scheme but lost the 2018 (Assembly) elections. The paradox is that people who took advantage of the bhagya schemes in the coastal belt voted for the BJP,” he said, adding that the guarantees addressed “secular” economic concerns while social identity trumped these issues come poll time too often.