The "no-reduction" policy would be that no masterpoint awards are reduced. To follow this policy, the team awards would be left the same and the pair awards would be doubled.
The problem with the "no-reduction" policy is that it will create massive inflation. There has been inflation in masterpoints since they began, but it has always been small and slow. Massive inflation tends to undermine the integrity of masterpoints.
A second choice is the "no-inflation" policy. In this policy, the level of the awards is set to keep overall inflation to a minimum. The no-inflation policy is the "right thing" to do.
The difficulty with the no-inflation policy is that it would require cutting awards for some events. For example, the team game would not award as many points as it used to.
The problem with cutting is that some ACBL members will be unhappy -- their masterpoints were taken away from them. This is not a wise or knowledgeable response on their part. Therefore, their unhappiness could be reduced by educating these members. This response also will not last long. But it is still a problem. The Board of Directors quite appropriately does not want unhappy members.
Some cutting is inevitable. And if massive inflation is chosen, I think members need to be educated about that too. So in any case, education is appropriate.
While I feel a need for immediate change, one possibility is for the ACBL to spread the more obvious reductions out over 2 years. For example, to achieve a 25% reduction in the awards for team games, there could be a 14% reduction one year and a 13% reduction the next. Then members would not notice the reductions.