The first budget of this government marks a critical juncture. For the first time in his political career, Prime Minister Narendra Modi is compelled to navigate the delicate terrain of coalition politics, reflecting a shift from his previous dominance with the BJP’s clear majorities. The budget’s strategic allocation of resources to the states of key allies underscores both the benefits and pitfalls of coalition governance. The allocation of over Rs 41,800 crore to infrastructure projects in Andhra Pradesh and Bihar has sparked significant debate.

On one hand, these investments are explained as vital for the development and self-reliance of these states. The Telugu Desam Party (TDP) and Janata Dal (United) have both expressed their satisfaction, viewing the budget as a red-letter day for their states. This strategic distribution of funds not only solidifies the coalition but also aims to address regional disparities and boost local economies. However, the opposition argues that these allocations are politically motivated. Critics label them as “bribes” to ensure the coalition’s stability, rather than allocations based on genuine need. This perspective raises an essential question about the fairness and objectivity in the distribution of national resources. States like Kerala, West Bengal, and Punjab, governed by opposition parties, feel marginalised and overlooked in the budget.

Kerala’s demand for a special package of Rs 24,000 crore went unmet, prompting accusations of partisan favouritism. The broader concern lies in the precedent this budget follows. If funds are allocated based on political alliances rather than objective indicators of need, other states may follow suit, demanding similar financial support. This could lead to a domino effect, straining the national budget and diverting funds from critical areas such as healthcare, education, and rural development. Former government advisors highlight this issue, questioning how equality among states can be maintained if political commitments overshadow objective criteria. Despite these criticisms, the government insists that no state will be left out. Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman reassured that every state would receive its due share, even if not explicitly mentioned in the budget speech. This assurance, however, does little to quell the discontent among opposition-ruled states at the feeling they have been short-changed.

Moreover, the budget attempts to tackle pressing issues such as unemployment and rural distress, which were pivotal in the recent elections. Allocating lakhs of crore rupees for job creation and rural development is a step in the right direction, but the impact of these measures will depend on effective implementation and equitable distribution. The budget is a delicate balancing act between political pragmatism and developmental needs. While the investments in Andhra Pradesh and Bihar might strengthen the coalition, they also risk undermining the principles of federalism and equitable resource allocation. Moving forward, it is crucial for the government to ensure that all states receive fair treatment, irrespective of their political alignment, to foster a truly inclusive and balanced development strategy.