The time frame issue is sharper for inflation data. We should look at consumer price indices (CPI), which economists say are statistically better constructed than the wholesale price index and which capture consumer-relevant prices better. Inflation as measured by state-level CPI for agricultural labour went up from 1.2 per cent in 2003-04 to 8.7 per cent in April-July of this year (the latest figures available). CPI for MP’s industrial workers went up in the same period from 2.0 per cent to 8.8 per cent. In the months before elections, therefore, MP’s aam voter did face high consumer prices. But the five-year averages of farm and non-farm CPIs for workers are around a moderate 6.5 per cent and the first three years of the BJP’s term saw below-average inflation. Over the whole term, MP’s voters didn’t suffer high inflation.

There’s some academic debate on whether voters blame state governments for inflation. But it’s hard to think of voters only blaming the Centre for high prices. State governments can’t remain unaffected. To the extent MP’s voters judged the incumbent on prices, the time horizon argument may indicate why inflation didn’t hurt the incumbent.

And when you look at roads — good roads are paved with positive voting intentions because better connectivity radically changes aam voters’ economic opportunities — another clue to MP’s verdict may be found.

After a bad start, the state government rapidly expanded expenditure on roads — from around Rs 140 crore in 2005 to almost Rs 600 crore in 2008. Spending on transport and communications, road projects come under this head, registered the second-highest compounded annual growth rate, 44.6 per cent, in the MP government’s major budget categories. If roads improved over the government’s term, voting decisions couldn’t have been indifferent to it.

... contd.