2. In a large metropolitan (metro) area with several separate school districts, students were initially allowed admission only to schools in the district where they lived. If they went to a private school, they had to pay the entire tuition charged by that school in addition to the property taxes that financed the public schools in their district. Then the metro area adopted a voucher system. It allowed students to apply for admission to any school in the metro area. Students who reside in a given district were to be given priority for admission to a school of their choice in the district. A school with vacancies would be required to admit applicants from outside the district. A school that admitted a student would receive the value of the student's voucher, paid by the combined governments of the metro area. Alternatively, a student could apply to a private school and, if admitted, could use the voucher to pay the school's tuition or part of that tuition. If the tuition was higher than the value of the voucher, the student's family would be responsible for paying the difference. Consider two school districts in this metro area. Before the voucher reform, district A had high property values and high spending per pupil in its public schools. District B, next to district A, had low property values and low spending per pupil compared to the average in the metro area. a.[6] Explain why a family in district A whose children go to public school might be worse off economically due to the voucher reform. Explain why a family in district B whose children go to public school might be better off economically due to the voucher reform. b.[4] What types of residents of the metro area are most likely to gain the most from the voucher reform? Explain. Hint: Consider how residents differ in income, school district, and where their children go to school if they have children. Other factors also may matter