From the Editorial Board

School vouchers and other programs that allow public funds to be funneled to private schools--sometimes called "education tax credits" or "opportunity scholarships"--are part of the national conversation on school reform. Recently, Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, former education secretary under George H. W. Bush, introduced legislation that would use a portion of federal education funds to create scholarships for low-income students so they could attend an accredited school of their parents' choosing. According to a story in The Chattanoogan (2014), the Scholarships for Kids Act would reallocate $24 billion in public school funds to create 11 million scholarships of $2,100 each for K-12 students living in poverty. In an article in The New York Times, Alexander explained that "the simplest way for [federal funds to support low-income students] is just to pin them to the blouse or shirt of a child and let it follow the child to the school they attend" (Rich, 2014, para. 3). Alexander likened his proposal to other federal assistance programs, namely Pell grants and the GI Bill, although he acknowledged that vouchers have not been widely accepted at the K-12 level. Voucher programs vary from state to state. Currently only Washington, D.C. has a federally funded school voucher program, but 16 states have adopted some form of publicly funded school choice vouchers. On February 17, 2014 North Carolina Superior Court Judge Robert Hobgood granted a preliminary injunction against the state's Opportunity Scholarships program, ruling it unconstitutional. North Carolina's state constitution dictates that resources allocated to public education "shall be faithfully appropriated and used exclusively for establishing and maintaining a uniform system of free public schools" (Article IX, Section 6), thereby prohibiting the use of public funds for private institutions. The Louisiana Supreme Court reached a similar conclusion in May 2013, ruling that the statewide voucher plan violated Louisiana's state constitution. A resolution to amend Alaska's constitution to allow the use of public monies for private schools was pulled from a floor vote in March 2014, while Tennessee, Florida, and Arizona have all introduced bills during the current legislative session to expand existing voucher programs. Proponents of vouchers see them as a means to secure educational equity and access for low-income students, as well as those currently attending failing schools. Voucher programs "provide crucial options to children who too often are forced to attend failing schools" (Alliance for School Choice, n.d., para. 4). In some states, vouchers allow students with special needs, in addition to those from low-income families, to attend private schools as a means to attain improved educational opportunity. Additionally, voucher proponents believe that increasing parent choice will encourage traditional public schools to improve conditions in order to maintain competitiveness (Sugarman, 2013). Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction John Huppenthal sent out an automated phone message publicizing Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (ESAs) in order "to apprise parents of a unique program" (Fisher, 2014, para. 7), stating that he works to ensure that "students are provided with excellent education opportunities" (Fischer, 2014, para. 9). Opponents of vouchers claim that such programs divert funds from public schools and frequently benefit private interests (National School Boards Association, n.d.), and they are concerned that using public funds to support parochial schools violates the separation of church and state. Additionally, the lack of accountability for private schools draws criticism, since most are not subject to the requisite standardized testing in public schools (Strauss, 2014). Florida's proposed voucher expansion bill was pulled by its sponsor after the state senate declared that private schools utilizing the vouchers would be required to administer state tests to their students (Kennedy, 2014). …