Rs 40,000 for more babies? Chandrababu Naidu’s plan is misguided | LME 137 | Pooja Prasanna

Chandrababu Naidu wants people in Andhra Pradesh to have more children. Not just one or two, but three or four children. 

And to encourage that, the AP government now says it will give Rs 30,000 for a third child and Rs 40,000 for a fourth.

Now at first, this may sound like one of those bizarre political statements that pop up every few months and disappear from the news cycle.

But Naidu's anxiety comes from a real place. South Indian states are worried about falling fertility rates, ageing populations, and even losing political influence in the future because they successfully controlled the population.

But asking people to simply “have more babies” may be one of the most misguided ways to respond to those problems.

Because population decline is not just about numbers. It is about whether people can actually afford to raise children. Whether schools, hospitals, childcare systems, and jobs are strong enough to support families. And whether governments are trying to solve structural problems with simplistic solutions.

So this week, let's look at who ultimately ends up paying the price for policies like these?

Let Me Explain.

Now before we get into the politics of it all, we have a small request.

At The News Minute, we spend a lot of time trying to unpack complicated stories beyond outrage and headlines. Whether it is politics, gender, cinema, caste, misinformation or policy, we try to tell stories with depth and context.

And our work takes time, effort, and independence.

We do not run on political funding. We rely on our readers and viewers to support this work.

So if you value independent journalism that actually explains the news instead of just screaming through it, consider supporting let me explain by scanning the qr code and clicking the link in the description below. 

Now, back to Naidu.

This is not the first time he has spoken about population decline.

Over the past few years, Naidu has repeatedly warned that south India could end up facing the same crisis countries like Japan and South Korea are dealing with — ageing populations, shrinking workforces, and fewer young people supporting older generations.

And yes, to an extent, that concern is real.

Fertility rates in south India have dropped sharply over the decades. Tamil Nadu’s total fertility rate is around 1.4. Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka are around 1.7. Kerala and Telangana are slightly higher.

A fertility rate of around 2.1 is generally considered necessary for a population to remain stable in the long run.

Part of Naidu’s anxiety also comes from politics.

Southern states fear that delimitation will eventually happen. This means Lok Sabha seats could be redistributed based on population. They worry that Hindi-belt states may gain much greater political representation because their populations grew faster.

That fear deserves a serious discussion.

We have addressed all this in detail in another episode of  Let Me Explain, so do check that out if you want a deeper breakdown.

But even if those fears are real, the solution being proposed here is deeply misguided.

Because people are not having fewer or no children for no reason. Children are expensive. Housing, education, healthcare, transport, coaching — everything costs more now.

Which makes a Rs 30,000 or Rs 40,000 incentive look less like a serious long-term solution and more like a symbolic announcement.

And then there’s the condition of public infrastructure itself.

Because if governments want people to raise more children, shouldn’t they first ensure decent schools, hospitals, childcare support, and employment opportunities?

A recent ASER report found that nearly half of Class 8 students in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana could not properly read a Class 2-level Telugu text.

And this is not the only indicator showing deeper structural problems.

Independent studies using the UN’s HDI methodology placed Andhra Pradesh’s HDI at 23rd in India, which is far behind other states despite Andhra’s economic ambitions.

Many government schools still lack basic infrastructure. Healthcare systems continue to be uneven. Unemployment remains a major concern.

And nutrition indicators among children are worrying too. Let’s look at data from NFHS-5 which is a govt of india survey providing data on population, health, and nutrition.

It found that stunting among children under five in Andhra Pradesh stood at around 31%.

And most of these conversations around population and fertility often ignore the condition of women themselves. NFHS-5 also found that nearly 60% of women in Andhra Pradesh were anaemic, which is the highest among south Indian states, and significantly above the national average of 53%.

So the obvious question becomes — why is the state focusing on increasing population before improving the quality of life for people already here?

And perhaps the biggest issue being ignored in all this is women. Because when politicians say “have more children”, who are they actually asking?

Women are still expected to work outside the home while also carrying most domestic labour inside it. 

There’s actually a term researchers use for this: the “motherhood penalty.” A recent article in The News Minute looked closely at this issue.

They point out that childbirth often comes with a direct economic cost for women. Careers slow down, wages drop, and employment becomes more precarious.

And this burden is not shared equally.

In India, women still do far more unpaid domestic and care work than men, even when they are employed full-time.

So when governments say “have more children”, they are often speaking as if childcare is simply a demographic issue.

But for millions of women, it is also a labour issue, an economic issue, and a question of personal freedom.

Especially because the support systems barely exist. Affordable childcare remains limited, and paternity leave is minimal.

And a large number of Indian women work in the informal sector, where maternity protections are almost non-existent.

And money is a huge component too. Because who is most likely to respond to these incentives? It’s certainly not wealthy families.

Which means poorer households may end up having larger families without adequate support systems to sustain them. And then what? Can the state provide quality education, healthcare, nutrition, and jobs for these children? The evidence right now is not encouraging.

Watch LME on delimitation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26rwMdF_Y2U&t=275s

Like Pooja’s LME? Support the show: https://rzp.io/rzp/support-lme

Like our journalism? Become a subscriber: https://www.thenewsminute.com/subscription

👉🏽Follow Let Me Explain WhatsApp channel:

https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VbDIedz2phHLQZTyNj1W

Produced by Megha Mukundan, script by Lakshmi Priya, Edit by Nikhil Sekhar ET, Camera by Ajay R