The Daily Tar Heel
Printing news. Raising hell. Since 1893.
Thursday, Dec. 26, 2024 Newsletters Latest print issue

We keep you informed.

Help us keep going. Donate Today.
The Daily Tar Heel

Opinion: The UNC community should stand by Gene Nichol

Gene Nichol, an outspoken critic of poverty and the state’s unwillingness to address it, must not be silenced. The University’s Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity closed last month, but its mission is resurrected with the establishment of the N.C. Poverty Research Fund.

The University must stand by Nichol and his fund, even as they are a target for criticism by conservative pundits with sway over public officials.

The fund was created to “explore, document, research and publish about the immense challenges of economic hardship in North Carolina,” according to its website. 

It seeks to continue the work of the poverty center, which was ordered closed by the overwhelmingly conservative Board of Governors in February.

Many North Carolinians remain impoverished.

Yet conservative pundits have characterized the fund’s work as an audacious undertaking.

In a blog post for the Pope Center for Higher Education, opinion journalist Jay Schalin argued that the creation of the fund was contemptful of the rule of law because of the fund’s similarity to the previous center. He also said Nichol’s work was one-sided and ideologically driven.

But the fund supports legitimate research interests, and it is misguided to assert that because Nichol is a vocal critic of conservative policies that his study of poverty in North Carolina lacks merit or is motivated by partisanship.

To his credit, John Fennebresque, the chairman of the Board of Governors, told The (Raleigh) News & Observer the fund did not fall under the board’s purview and said he wished it success.

But if public universities have no business to study poverty as they choose, as some conservative pundits claim, what answers can the public expect to receive? The John Locke Foundation published an article claiming, “economic growth is clearly the most effective antipoverty weapon ever devised by men.”

This claim is not supported by data. In reality, income per capita in the United States has increased 15 percent from 2009 to 2014, yet the portion of the nation’s population living in poverty increased from 14.3 percent to 15.8 percent.

University of California-Berkeley economist Emmanuel Saez shed light on why in a 2013 study. While income for the top one percent of the country’s earners ballooned, the earnings of the bottom 99 percent barely budged.

Organizations making unsubstantiated claims about poverty lack the credibility of academics.

The UNC community should support the fund’s work with both words and financial support.

To get the day's news and headlines in your inbox each morning, sign up for our email newsletters.