Policy makers and educators in the U.S. have recently shown considerable interest in the concept of weighted student funding (WSF) as a means of financing primary and secondary schools. WSF appeals both to conservatives, who see it as a way to promote parental choice and school autonomy, and to progressives, who are attracted by the call of extra funds for challenging-to-educate students. This paper draws lessons for the U.S. from the Netherlands, which has long experience with WSF. We find that, while WSF has succeeded in directing significant amounts of additional funds to primary schools serving educationally disadvantaged pupils, this policy has been shaped by contextual factors that differ in important respects from those in the U.S. These include a deeply embedded right to parental choice, a centralized funding system, a political system that fosters policy stability, and a national value system that accepts pluralism and encourages tolerance and fairness. (Contains 12 footnotes.)