Academic Freedom Under Attack as University Rejects Conservative Economist

The intellectual dishonesty of the academic left has claimed another victim as Northern Michigan University (NMU) passed over highly qualified economist Scott Beaulier for its presidency following a calculated misrepresentation of his groundbreaking research on welfare reform.

Beaulier, whose distinguished career includes pioneering work in behavioral economics, faced criticism for a 2002 paper that dared to question the efficacy of America’s welfare state. The paper, “Behavioral Economics and Perverse Effects of the Welfare State,” presented evidence-based analysis showing how well-intentioned welfare policies often trap recipients in cycles of poverty.

The facts are clear: Beaulier’s research, co-authored during his doctoral studies at George Mason University, applied established principles of behavioral economics to welfare policy. The paper demonstrated how psychological biases and imperfect decision-making can be exacerbated by welfare programs, leading to long-term negative outcomes for recipients.

Let’s be precise about what the research actually concluded. Beaulier’s work showed that government assistance can amplify poor judgment and self-control problems, making a compelling case for reforming welfare through benefit reductions, duration limits, and stricter eligibility requirements. This aligns with extensive economic research and real-world evidence, including failed universal basic income experiments in Canada and Finland.

But facts didn’t matter to the left-wing activists who orchestrated this academic hit job. Andrew Plocher, a part-time graduate student and self-described pastor, launched a dishonest campaign against Beaulier, cherry-picking quotes from a two-decade-old paper to paint him as prejudiced against minorities and the poor.

This represents a familiar pattern in academia: rather than engaging with substantive policy arguments, the left resorts to character assassination and emotional manipulation. Plocher’s letter to NMU’s Board of Trustees deliberately mischaracterized Beaulier’s research on cognitive biases and behavioral patterns as expressions of contempt for welfare recipients.

The reality is that Beaulier’s work sought to improve outcomes for the very people these programs aim to help. By identifying how welfare policies can inadvertently reinforce destructive decision-making patterns, his research provides crucial insights for developing more effective anti-poverty measures.

NMU’s capitulation to this pressure campaign sends a chilling message about the state of academic freedom in American universities. When qualified candidates can be eliminated based on deliberately distorted interpretations of their scholarly work, we’ve abandoned the principles of open inquiry and rational debate that should define higher education.

This episode demonstrates why conservative voices are increasingly rare in academia: not because their ideas lack merit, but because ideological gatekeepers use misrepresentation and character assassination to maintain their monopoly on acceptable thought.

Related: Trump Lauds Successful Drug Sub Strike While Ecuador Fumbles Response