As Delhi goes to the polls on Wednesday to elect a new state Assembly, the promises made by the Aam Aadmi Party, Indian National Congress and Bharatiya Janata Party are igniting spirited debates. Each party’s manifesto lays out a blend of long-term welfare initiatives and immediate, sometimes populist, incentives.

However, rather than examining these proposals in isolation, it is useful to compare them side by side to understand the emerging narrative – a narrative that challenges us to try to decide whether these promises are truly transformative welfare measures or mere freebies aimed at short-term public appeasement.

Healthcare and education

At the heart of all three manifestos is a focus on healthcare and education, albeit with differing approaches.

AAP’s Sanjeevani Yojana pledges free healthcare for Delhi’s senior citizens, covering all expenses in both government and private hospitals – a measure that echoes a commitment to comprehensive social security.

The Congress has proposed free healthcare coverage up to Rs 25 lakh for every Delhi resident, complete with free medicines and diagnostics. This signals an ambition to overhaul the healthcare system for residents of all income groups.

The BJP, meanwhile, builds on a more targeted approach by expanding the Central government’s Ayushman Bharat Scheme that aims to provide free access to health insurance coverage for low income earners. In Delhi, the BJP has promised to offer Rs 10 lakh health insurance for senior citizens and economically disadvantaged families.

While all three parties aim to bolster healthcare, their scope and focus vary: AAP and the Congress lean towards universal welfare, whereas the BJP positions its healthcare expansion as part of a broader developmental narrative.

Education and empowerment also form crucial pillars in these electoral promises. AAP’s Dr Ambedkar Scholarship is designed to support Dalit students in accessing top global universities, investing in long-term human capital development. The Congress, on the other hand, pledges to replace the National Education Policy with a Delhi-specific version, aiming to elevate school enrolment, create new schools, and to establish 700 libraries. These measures suggest a systematic effort to raise educational standards and opportunities.

The BJP, though less detailed in its educational promises, counters with Central government schemes such as the Mahila Samridhi Yojana, which provides financial support for women – an indirect investment in education and empowerment by promoting financial independence.

Direct financial aids and subsidies form another common thread in the manifestos. They reveal a fascinating spectrum of priorities and methodologies.

AAP’s Mahila Samman Yojana offers a monthly allowance of Rs 2,100 to women, while the Congress provides Rs 2,500 for women in poor households and Rs 8,500 for unemployed youth. These cash transfers are designed to offer immediate relief to vulnerable sections, but they should be scrutinised for their long-term sustainability.

The BJP adds to this mix with subsidies like free electricity for up to 200 units and a Rs 500 discount on LPG cylinders, even sweetening the deal with free cylinders during festivals.

Together, these financial aids illustrate the delicate balancing act between fostering immediate voter support and laying down the foundations for enduring welfare.

Infrastructure and social inclusion

Beyond individual financial benefits, the manifestos reveal a common concern for infrastructural and social inclusion measures. AAP’s promise of 24-hour clean water supply addresses a fundamental public service need that has long plagued Delhi, positioning it as an infrastructural improvement rather than a mere populist gesture.

The Congress, meanwhile, proposes to create a ministry for the welfare of the Purvanchali community with origins in eastern Uttar Pradesh and Bihar and a comprehensive Delhi caste survey, highlighting its focus on social inclusivity and structural reform. These initiatives are not simply about immediate relief; they are crafted to integrate historically marginalised communities into the broader development narrative.

The BJP’s approach, while also recognising the need for social welfare through schemes like the Mahila Samridhi Yojana, largely centres on developmental promises that dovetail with its health and utility subsidies.

This shared emphasis by all the parties on infrastructure and inclusion underscores a common understanding: that genuine progress requires both immediate action and long-term planning.

Systemic changes

The debate between welfare and freebies hinges on the sustainability and depth of these initiatives. Welfare measures are designed to catalyse long-term improvements in quality of life by addressing systemic challenges, be it in healthcare, education or social inclusion.

The proposals in this regard by AAP and the Congress seem to be more than superficial fixes: they are ambitious projects that aim to reshape public services and social structures.

However, the immediate cash transfers and subsidies that all three parties promote carry the risk of being perceived as temporary appeasements, especially if they are not underpinned by robust, long-term fiscal strategies.

The fiscal sustainability of these promises is a critical issue. Unplanned expenditure on short-term benefits can lead to budget deficits and divert resources from essential infrastructural projects.

While the Congress’s comprehensive approach combining free healthcare, employment schemes and social inclusion policies may appear promising on paper, it also raises questions about long-term economic management.

The BJP’s selective subsidies, though designed to win popular favour during festivals and routine consumption, might ultimately offer little in terms of sustainable development if they remain isolated measures without being integrated into broader policy frameworks.

AAP, straddling both worlds, presents a mixed bag where progressive healthcare and water supply initiatives coexist with direct cash transfers that could potentially foster dependency if not carefully managed.

Voter’s dilemma

When viewed side by side, the manifestos of AAP, the Congress and the BJP paint a picture of competing visions for Delhi’s future – each attempting to walk the tightrope between long-term welfare and short-term appeasement.

The common thread running through all these proposals is the attempt to directly address the immediate needs of the electorate, from healthcare and education to everyday utilities and financial aid. However, the underlying challenge remains: how can Delhi balance the urgency of public demands with the need for sustainable development?

For the discerning voter, this question is not merely academic. It is about weighing the tangible benefits of immediate financial support against the potential for transformative, systemic reforms. Will these promises translate into lasting improvements in public services and social equity or are they simply tailored giveaways designed to secure electoral victories without a clear vision for long-term prosperity?

The answer lies in scrutinising not just the promises themselves, but also the fiscal discipline and strategic vision underpinning them. A policy that invests in robust infrastructure, inclusive education, and universal healthcare can build a resilient society. Conversely, an overreliance on freebies, without a roadmap for future sustainability, may result in short-lived gains and long-term fiscal strain.

In the end, the debate is not simply about who offers the best immediate deal but about charting a sustainable path forward for Delhi. Voters must consider the long-term implications of these promises, ensuring that the focus remains on building a resilient, inclusive, and well-developed city.

Nirmanyu Chouhan is a researcher of socio-political issues, especially voter behavior and identity politics.