This is the third in the series of comments on the “reform” narrative by a reader who calls himself or herself “Democracy.”

Here Democracy explains the “reform that reformers don’t want.”

Part 3:

Hanushek, and people who cite him, say that American economic competitiveness is dependent on school “reform.” Hanushek cites economist Robert Lucas to bolster his contention. Lucas is the prototypical free market conservative who subscribes to and believes in “supply-side policies.” Lucas thinks that the economy has slowed due to “ fiscal policy that threatens higher taxes on the rich, and promises higher spending on programs like healthcare,” even though the U.S. has the biggest – by far – income stratification gap in the developed world, now spends far MORE on health care than any other developed nation, and the Congressional Budget Office says the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 will help to reduce health care spending and decrease the deficit. Lucas said economists who supported President Obama’s stimulus package “were either incompetent (“schlock economics” was the phrase) or corrupt.”

Not surprisingly, both Robert Lucas and Eric Hanushek signed onto 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain’s plans to make the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 permanent and to reduce corporate income taxes

Eric Hanushek has written that “if we could replace the bottom 5%-10% of teachers with an average teacher—not a superstar—we could dramatically improve student achievement. The U.S. could move from below average in international comparisons to near the top.” And, American economic competitiveness would be restored (with those trillions and trillions of dollars added to the economy). But Hanushek’ assertions don’t seem to add up. Maybe because they’re just made up; they’re not true.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) ranks nations each year on their economic competitiveness. When the U.S. drops, the WEF cites things like “a number of escalating weaknesses,” including poor business “auditing and reporting standards,” declining “corporate ethics,” “repeated fiscal deficits,” and unsustainable public debt. The WEF notes that “mapping out a clear exit strategy will be an important step in reinforcing the country’s competitiveness going into the future.”

This year (2012-13) the WEF dropped the U.S. to 7th place, citing problems like “increasing inequality and youth unemployment” and, environmentally, “the United States is among the countries that have ratified the fewest environmental treaties.“ The WEF noted that in the U.S.,”the business community continues to be critical toward public and private institutions” and “trust in politicians is not strong.” Political dysfunction has led to “a lack of macroeconomic stability” that “continues to be the country’s greatest area of weakness.”

People like Hanushek place the blame and burden on public schools, though they had absolutely nothing to do with the Great Recession, deficits and debt, and job losses. The new mantra is “Common Core.” The U.S. Chamber of Commerce says that ““Common core academic standards among the states are essential” toU.S. competitiveness. The Business Roundtable resurrects the “rising tide of mediocrity” myth of A Nation at Risk, saying (falsely) that “Since the release of A Nation at Risk in 1983, it has been increasingly clear that…academic expectations for American students have not been high enough.” Sadly Arne Duncan parrots what they say. So too do most mainstream education “reporters,” if they can be called that.

In plain speak, alleviating poverty and its pernicious effects, and providing children with high quality environments before they get to school, and following up with health and academic and social policy programs while they are in school, result not only in high-quality education but also in a high-quality citizenry….and in promoting the general welfare of the nation. This is surely not what the “reformers” want. It might – it will – require a cessation to their gaming of the “markets” and the tax system.

The public education system in a democratic republic is supposed to develop and nurture democratic character and citizenship. That’s the kind of reform we need.

But it’s exactly the kind of reform the “reformers” don’t want.