Between attempting to rejuvenate the economy and to institute sweeping health care reform, education has taken a backseat in national reform discussions.The problems are clear. American fourth-graders were recently ranked 11th in the world in math. Just this week we found out our state completely flunked an assessment of high school graduation rates — posting the biggest drop at 4 percent.Unfortunately, we can’t just throw money at the issue. Although we certainly need increased funding for public schools, any reform measures should begin with a look at how we educate students. That starts with the institutions.As part of the economic stimulus plan, the Obama administration has earmarked some $5 billion specifically for charter schools — privately operated schools which receive funding from the government. Education Secretary Arne Duncan has said that states without charter school laws will miss out on the funding.Some proponents of privately run education fall into the camp of “school choice.” Under such a plan families would receive “vouchers” which could be used to defray the cost of private education.Advocates believe giving parents a choice in where they want to send their children is central to education reform. By having the power to choose their child’s school, they will introduce competition to the education market and subsequently improve the quality of the product.This all sounds hunky dory, but there are a few complications.There are concerns about how such an arrangement will affect children of different incomes. If wealthy families are already sending their children to private schools, can we afford to give them a tax break? Critics believe vouchers are essentially a scheme to give welfare to the richest members of our society.In fact, private schools that are already able to sell their product to families with significant disposable income might just increase their tuition by the amount of the voucher. This increase, of course, would disproportionately benefit children with wealthy parents — their schools would have more money and their doors would remain closed to less wealthy children.To prevent this situation, the government should have a regressive voucher system where a family’s income will have a negative effect on the amount of its voucher credit.Another drawback of a voucher system is the revival of an age-old debate in the U.S.: The separation of church and state. In a state with hundreds of Catholic schools, whether religious schools are allowed to accept vouchers will be a contentious issue (and low-hanging fruit for politicians). Proponents believe, because the money being redistributed is “theirs,” they should be allowed to decide to enroll their children in religious schools.The problem is in reality the revenues used to fund education are paid by families without children as well. We are willing to pay for other kids’ schooling because of the benefits it creates for society. Allowing vouchers to be used by religious schools will in effect be subsidizing religion. If the price of tuition increases under this arrangement — as it clearly could — it would further fill the coffers of the school (and of the church connected with it). This is not consistent with the founding principles of our nation.A system of privately run schools competing with one another is an exciting possibility for solving our education problem. But we need to make sure certain groups of people — whether it’s the rich or the religious — do not get any handouts.Mark Macmurdo is a 22-year-old history and economics senior from Baton Rouge. Follow him on Twitter @TDR_mmacmurdo.—-Contact Mark Macmurdo at [email protected]