Government-funded schools pose a dilemma when you're opposing educational reforms. On one hand, democracies need educated citizens to participate in the election processes, recognize demagogues and dismiss propaganda. On the other hand, government is given to excessive growth, special interests, boondoggles and pork barrel projects. Assume that state-sponsored education systems are a necessary evil to be curtailed, but not entirely eliminated,
When education systems are given additional funds, they yield more costly, bloated bureaucracies. They take the money and run up bigger budgets, expenses, and salaries for the upper echelons. Their lack of market mechanisms, accountabilities and principles of private enterprises -- prevent them from becoming more efficient, productive and useful. If there is to be any reforms in education, make them more business-like. Cut out the fat, trim the budgets and streamline the procedures. Impose uniform standards. Hold everyone more accountable. Eliminate the slackers and reward the high achievers.
When bureaucrats promote educational reforms, they are looking to line their own pockets and pad their own budgets. Opposing education reforms is fiscally responsible. Taking exception to costly "improvements" sends a message that school systems need to deliver "more bang for the buck", not "more bucks for the bang".
When educational reformers want more money, think of what it will cost taxpayers for years to come. Don't consider what good could get done with the increased funding. When reformers want new programs, think of how they will be mismanaged by do-nothings. Don't entertain the value, impact and results those programs could deliver. When advocates of change accuse you of blocking improvements in education, see through their their do-gooder claims to fame -- to their selfish underlying motives. Don't perceive compassion, community-minded spirit or commitment to quality education in the reformers' frustrations with your stance. Please accept this permission without question.