I think from an overall human resource allocation view, you don’t want imbalances in access to education depending on where you live in the country. Poor education in Mississippi and great education in Massachusetts means better educated and higher income people moving to Massachusetts, thus a poorer economy in Mississippi.
The demand and supply for primary and secondary educational services is not entirely market-based. The supply of primary and secondary educational services is provided mostly by local government. How many of us would purchase education out-of-pocket?
I wouldn’t want to take a chance that a significant portion of society does not get access to primary and secondary education; however, the issue boils down to what is the federal government’s role in the market for education?