Post by Will Findlay-Wilson, CFA

Whilst Trump grabs a lot of environmental, immigration and foreign policy headlines, the rest of his domestic social agenda doesn't get much airtime. One issue often missed by commentators that speaks to Trump’s brand is School Choice. School Choice has heritage dating back to the 1950s: state minimalists argue for the expansion of choice across the country, giving parents the right to choose between public schools, charter school, magnet schools, private schools and virtual or home-schooling options. Perhaps more radical, in some instances taxpayer funds destined for public schools flow to these alternatives. Today, turbocharged by the pandemic, the culture war issues of book banning, and gender politics have sat alongside arguments around the free market and freedom of choice, creating an increasingly divisive issue. Since President Trump’s election in November 2024, he has pushed forward controversial candidate Linda McMahon (likely best known as former CEO of WWE) for Education Secretary. Both Trump and Linda McMahon have expressed strong support for charter schools and School Choice nationwide. In September 2023 Trump stated ‘I will immediately fight to allow homeschool parents to have the same incredible benefit, $10,000 a year per child, completely tax free to spend on costs associated with homeschool education’. The National Education Association, the US’ largest education focussed professional organisation/labour union, said of McMahon’s appointment “McMahon’s only mission is to eliminate the Department of Education and take away taxpayer dollars from public schools, where 90% of students - and 95% of students with disabilities – learn, and give them to unaccountable and discriminatory private schools”. On 23 January 2025, Trump signed two executive orders aimed at expanding school choice. Whether and how to implement school choice is largely devolved to state level government in the US, so Trump’s bold offers are to a large degree political grandstanding, but federal politics can still be influential in setting a tone. The US already has a significant homeschool population - estimates suggest more than 5% of children 5-17 are homeschooled, and these numbers are on the rise, driven by virtual schools. Homeschooling has also been cited as a means of parents isolating their children from important societal ideas, reducing soft skills, and enhancing polarised opinions. Still arguments around better outcomes for children with complex needs or located in poorer regions with inadequate schooling are valid, and proponents cite better educational outcomes and higher test scores. Why should children be bound by what is offered in their local area? Some companies play in this industry, and investors must weigh up providing educational opportunities on one hand against an incredibly divisive social issue with political influence and changeable regulation on the other. There’s impact, but it’s political.