Ummm, the education system in every state is taxpayer funded from K-12 grades. Are you against taxpayer funded education systems in general? If so, how exactly would you propose putting your kids through the public school system?
The system worked in California for 100 years because corporate tax rates were where they should be relative to their profits, because people paid income taxes based upon what their income was. Reagan was the forefather of the the rich getting richer and the end of those rich paying their fair share of income taxes. It's a pretty easy concept- when corporate taxes and income taxes were an equitable system the state of California flourished and it's higher education system did as well as it's K-12 system.
The utter collapse of the public education system in this country can be directly attributed to the reduction of corporate tax rates and the increasing tax breaks for the rich. It is a simple premise, you're right.
The basic flaw in your premise is that we as a nation are spending more per student adjusted for inflation, than we were in 1980. And we are spending a similar amount of our GDP now as we were then (5.5 in 1980 vs 5.4 now). The cuts in corporate tax rates have had no impact on spending for education in the nation as a whole. If there is an impact, its on fiscal health. Unless you are saying that without the tax cuts, we would have spent more on education than we are spending now (which id doubtful) The fact that much of that money being spent is borrowed instead of taxed is irrelevant regarding the quality education received.
So if one accepts your opinion that the education system iin the US has collapsed (and I certainly don't accept it), then I am not sure you can blame tax cuts since there isn't any noticeable impact on spending.