The other day, the Washington Post ran a compelling editorial in favor of vouchers for poor D.C. students:

AMONG THE most maddening arguments used against the D.C. school voucher program is that it hurts the public schools. Any money set aside for vouchers comes on top of a generous federal allocation for the city's public and charter schools. Any effect of the vouchers on public education has yet to be established or studied. Most of all, which members of Congress would accept an argument that they should be forced to send their children to a failing school for the good of the school?

Yet critics repeatedly return to this canard. That's why it's important that Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) reiterate to Congress that his school reform efforts will not be helped by depriving 1,900 poor children of an opportunity to choose their schools.

I waited for the letters to the editor as I knew there would be some opposition, including this letter writer from the Secular Coalition for America:

For parents who are looking for real school choice, there are public magnet and charter schools. The OSP does not offer school "choice" at all. When the Government Accountability Office published a study on the program last year, it concluded that Opportunity Scholarships fail to deliver the promise of school choice, because the bulk of participating schools are religious. Worse yet, the GAO also noted that the program lacks an opt-out clause for students wishing to avoid religious exercises.

The Post claimed that stopping this federal funding will amount to "depriving 1,900 poor children of an opportunity to choose their schools." But every student is welcome to stay in the school of his or her choice. Why would a school that is supposedly doing a good job be unable to raise private scholarship money for tuition? Students' religious training needs to be privately supported; given the cost of this program to taxpayers and to our secular tradition, extending a five-year mistake into a six-year one is just not justifiable.

Initially, I was torn after reading the Post editorial. No doubt many of the voucher recipients are low-income minority students living in run-down neighborhoods -- pretty much my family in Miami. Thanks to the generosity of the Catholic Church and my parents' own commitment, I received a kindergarten to 8th grade parochial education free of charge.

But I can't speak to the academic stellarness of the school as I feel it lagged behind the public high school I attended in New Hampshire and I easily scored the lowest in the SAT at that school. (My friends in Miami, who continued to attend Catholic high schools, scored even lower!)

I did some research on vouchers at Wikipedia and the Milwaukee voucher system, which is the oldest in the country. As it turns out, this whole voucher debate is much more nuanced than politicians and the media make it out to be.

As you probably already know, Sen. Barack Obama won the Virginia, Maryland and D.C. primaries yesterday by comfortable double-digit margins, according to CNN. He made significant inroads among white rural voters, Latinos and women, propelling him to the lead in the delegate count, even with Super Delegates taken into consideration.

Nonetheless, he has only slightly more than half the delegates needed to clinch the nomination. Damn, running for president is a grueling process. Then again, it is great we are making the candidates earn each and every single vote this campaign season.

Take That Ann Landers! Child-free movement websites such as this one often cite a 1970s study by Ann Landers that showed 70 percent of parents were unhappy and regretted having children. But Parenting -- not to be confused with Parents --  recently released an admittedly unscientific study that more than 80 percent of its readers would have had their children and even have had them earlier.

Here are the results of the magazine’s online poll:

If you had to do it over again:
59% would have had kids exactly when you did
23% would have had them earlier
16% would have had them later
2% would not have become a mom at all

Valentine’s Day Downer: Parenting magazine also released a poll showing that 69 percent of its readers dreaded traveling with their husbands more than their children. Ouch.

J-Lo Gossip: Okay, I am so behind on my celebrity gossip that I did not realize Jennifer Lopez was due to have twins tomorrow! Also, rumor has it her twins -- a boy and a girl -- will be named Max and Emme, according to Latina magazine.

What else is on your minds, MotherTalkers?

Maryland, Virginia and D.C. hold their primaries today. The polls in Virginia close at 7 p.m. local time. Voters in Maryland and D.C. have until 8 p.m. to cast their ballots.

Just curious: Are any of you still undecided? What a bizarre, but exciting primary, eh? This is the first primary in my (short) lifetime that every single vote will count. And I agree with what's been said about voter turnout. The fact so many new voters are in the mix makes me more confident about November.

Have fun watching -- and participating!