Buying the People’s Votes With the People’s Money

Every few years, the residents of Tamil Nadu have a curious custom. They vote for the, “most contemptible Tamilian.” (MCT) Each of the recent contests has pitted J. Jayalalitha and M. Karunanidhi (who named his son “Stalin”). The “winner” gets to be Chief Minister. They have fun arresting each other.

Currently the MCT is Jayalalitha, a heroine of Tamilian movies who now plays the heavy (she weighs about 300 pounds) in Tamilian politics. She certainly has skills as a politician.

Recently, Charukesi (who writes an excellent blog) wrote about a program in which Tamil Nadu would donate bicycles to girls of poor families (lower caste) in Tamil Nadu. I could not find the exact news article Charu referred to, but there is a little background here and here. Both Charu and the commenters on her blog viewed this news favorably, but I think nothing good can come of this. To me, this looks like a classic example of a politician trying to buy the people’s votes with the people’s money, and that is simply wrong.

The justification for the bicycle giveaway is that it helps these girls gain an education. Who could be against an education? It is a good investment. But there are several questions here:
1. Are these bicycles going to all disadvantaged girls or is Jayalalitha playing favorites?
2. What about disadvantaged boys? Does India really want to play gender politics on top of caste and religion politics?
3. If the bicycles were really a good investment, wouldn’t the vast majority of these families already have a bicycle (of perhaps superior quality)?
4. Do these bicycles only go to homes where the girls have to travel at least 3 miles or more to get to the nearest school or do they go to all disadvantage girls?
5. If it is a good idea for government to buy bicycles in the name of promoting education, would it then be justifiable for the government to buy pencils, pens, paper, electric lights or gas lights, tables, chairs, beds…(you get the idea) in the name of promoting education? After all, everything necessary for the home could indirectly promote learning in a direct or indirect way.

I believe that the government should stick to providing public goods: roads, utilities, police protection, etc. Goods that can be provided in the private sector should be paid for by private money. There may be economic justification for a subsidy here or a tax there (and this can get out of hand if not checked) but Indians should insist that they have the final say about what goods they get to buy for their homes.

Charu suggested that without government help, the poor families could not afford the bicycles since a bicycle could cost as much as 3 months salary. This is probably true for a mundane reason: they are not necessary for education or for any other purpose. A distance too far to walk for you or me might not be too far for a poor girl. If the bicycles were necessary, these villagers would definitely find a way to buy them. In Sunil Laxman’s blog, he recalled talking to a waiter (not the lowest income worker, but not rich) and he said it was not uncommon in Orissa for people to spend the equivalent of 5 years of income for one wedding, (the mind boggles). I've been told that that Tamil Nadu wedding are not so extravagant but still very expensive. Obviously, if people could afford to spend like that for a wedding, it would not be too much to spend 3 months of wages to buy a tool that presumably is critical to the daughter’s educational success. I strongly suspect that these bicycles will largely wind up being sold for annas on the rupee.

The main reason why you don’t want politicians spending your money to buy you gifts is that you could have spent that money yourself. If the choice is between spending the money on these girl’s bicycles and spending the money on masala dosas for Jayalalitha and company, then who could argue against the bicycles. But if the money would have been spent on roads or other legitimate services, or rebated back to the taxpayer, the people are poorer. I remember riding on the roads in Tamil Nadu in 1995. Perhaps they are better now (I would hope so), but if not, that is where the money should go.