See All News by Ravish Kumar
By Ravish Kumar
What has unfolded in Bihar this election season is unprecedented. Voters have smashed every turnout record since the first general elections of 1951. But what drove this surge? Is Bihar yearning for a transformative change? Or is the electorate fiercely committed to preserving the status quo?
Political experts and researchers will spend years decoding what truly happened here. But one thing is undeniable: this election raises profound questions about the very foundations of Indian democracy.
The Women Who Outvoted Men — For the First Time in Absolute Numbers
Much of the discussion revolves around women voters — and rightly so. Bihar’s polling numbers are historic:
-
Phase 1:
-
Women: 69.4%
-
Men: 61.56%
-
-
Phase 2:
-
Women: 74.03%
-
Men: 64.1%
-
For the first time ever, women cast 4.34 lakh more votes than men. More than 3.5 crore women voted. This is not just a statistic — it’s a political earthquake.
Yet this rise in female turnout comes with a troubling question:
Did women vote out of conviction, or as gratitude for money transferred directly into their accounts?
40% of Bihar’s Voters Received Government Money Before Polls
Let’s look at what happened just weeks before voting:
-
Old-age, disability, and widow pensions were raised from ₹400 to ₹1100. Beneficiaries: 1 crore+
-
₹10,000 transferred each to 1.3 crore women under business-promotion schemes
-
Payments to vikas mitras, shiksha mitras, unemployed youth, and others
Add it up — and you realize something startling:
Nearly 40% of all voters received direct cash benefits before the election.
When such a huge chunk of the electorate receives money during the campaign period, can we still call this a fair contest?
Is This Empowerment — Or Vote Engineering?
Supporters hail these transfers as welfare. Critics call them “gratitude votes.”
The truth probably lies somewhere in between.
A woman who earns ₹6,000 a month suddenly sees ₹10,000 in her account — a life-changing amount. Expecting her to not feel obliged is unrealistic.
But what does this mean for democracy?
When the state can legally transfer money to millions right before elections, how can the opposition compete? How is the idea of a “level playing field” preserved?
Exit Polls, Narratives, and the Battle for Perception
Even before polling ended, exit polls projected an NDA sweep. BJP workers began ordering celebratory laddoos. Claims flew thick and fast:
-
“Women voted overwhelmingly for Nitish Kumar.”
-
“The increased turnout is a vote for stability.”
-
“BJP will cross 160 seats.”
Tejashwi Yadav countered that the turnout represented a powerful urge for change.
Yet the truth is simple:
We have no post-poll data proving women voted overwhelmingly for one side.
What we do have is a massive cash transfer targeted at female voters — and that alone clouds every claim.
Has Bihar’s Democracy Become a Cash Economy?
The irony is bitter.
For years, unaccounted cash circulated in Indian elections — under the table, behind closed doors. That corruption hasn’t vanished. But now the state itself has become the largest distributor.
What was once illegal cash distribution has now been institutionalized.
If ₹30,000 crore can be distributed right before the polls, then issues like unemployment, migration, and poverty — Bihar’s deepest wounds — get buried under money.
Where does this path lead?
To a democracy where policy becomes indistinguishable from political bribery.
Women's Turnout Was Rising Anyway — Long Before the Cash Transfers
It is important to remember:
-
In 2010, women’s turnout: 54.5% (higher than men)
-
In 2015, women: 60.4% (men: 53.3%)
-
In 2019 LS, women: 59.5% (men: 54.9%)
-
In 2020, women: 59.7% (men: 54.6%)
Women have been politically active for a decade. Their turnout was rising regardless of cash transfers.
So why did this particular election cross 70%?
Is it only money?
Is it aspiration?
Is it anger?
Is it hope?
Nobody has a definitive answer.
The Opposition’s Failure to Counter the ‘Cash Narrative’
The opposition, too, promised money — sometimes more than the ruling alliance. But it never built a coherent narrative warning women that their votes were being purchased.
Priyanka Gandhi came close when she said:
“Take the ₹10,000 — but vote for your children’s future.”
But one speech cannot match a multi-thousand-crore machinery.
The Larger Democratic Crisis
This election signals something far bigger than Bihar:
-
Direct cash transfers right before elections are becoming normalized.
-
Election campaigns are turning into competitive giveaways.
-
The Election Commission is silent.
-
Media is complicit.
-
Oversight is nonexistent.
The line between welfare and inducement is disappearing.
If a political party can spend ₹30,000 crore before voting, how can faith in electoral fairness survive?
Bihar may have just become the test case for a new kind of democracy — one where votes are not stolen, but bought with taxpayer money.
So What Did Bihar Vote For?
Nobody can say for sure — not exit polls, not political parties, not analysts.
But one thing is certain:
When money precedes voting, democracy follows money.
Whether NDA wins or the Mahagathbandhan sweeps — the deeper question remains unanswered:
Has Bihar voted for change?
Or has Bihar been changed by money?
Only time will tell.
