Penny Schwinn and the Myth of Market-Driven Solutions: A Blueprint for Neoliberal Looting
Penny Schwinn’s nomination for Deputy Secretary of Education has sent the corporate media into a flurry of excitement, with glowing coverage that frames her as a visionary reformer. The gleeful tone is no coincidence—they know precisely what this nomination signals and, more importantly, whom it will serve. Schwinn is no harmless educator or well-meaning “soccer mom.” Over the course of her career, she has pursued a calculated agenda designed to prioritise corporate interests above the needs of students, teachers, and communities. Her tenure in education leadership has been marked by no-bid contracts, conflicts of interest, and policies that strip public systems for parts whilst enriching private entities.
The media’s enthusiasm masks the reality of Schwinn’s record. This nomination is not about expertise or service; it is about advancing a neoliberal agenda that rebrands capitalist looting as reform. The term “market-driven solutions” has long been the rhetorical fig leaf covering policies that extract public resources and hand them over to private corporations. Schwinn’s career offers a textbook example of how this works. From her controversial contracts in Texas to her tenure in Tennessee, she has consistently placed profit over public welfare, leaving schools underfunded and communities in crisis. The media, ever loyal to the capitalist machine, celebrates these moves as innovation while ignoring the harm they inflict on the most vulnerable.
The stakes are immense, and the consequences will be felt most acutely by those already marginalised. Title I schools, perpetually underfunded, will face even greater resource depletion. Teachers, especially those from marginalised communities, will encounter increasing hostility in a system that sees them as expendable. Meanwhile, students—particularly those in impoverished areas—will be left with fewer opportunities and a system that prioritises profit over learning. The corporate media’s cheerleading for Schwinn’s nomination is not just a distraction; it is a calculated move to obscure the looting that is already underway. Public education, one of the last bastions of collective good, is being dismantled piece by piece, and those celebrating Schwinn’s rise know exactly what is coming—and who stands to benefit.
The Pattern of Exploitation in Schwinn’s Career
Penny Schwinn’s tenure in Tennessee reveals a pattern of exploitation that is anything but the fabled “invisible hand of the market” at work. Instead, it is the deliberate handiwork of a privateer, pillaging and looting their way across the educational landscape. Her leadership was characterised by scandal after scandal, where public funds were misused to enrich private companies at the expense of students and teachers. One of the most egregious examples was the awarding of a no-bid contract to ClassWallet, a Florida-based company hired to manage Tennessee’s school voucher program. The contract, worth $1.25 million per year, was twice the amount budgeted by the legislature and bypassed competitive bidding entirely. Schwinn defended this move as necessary to expedite the voucher rollout, but the reality was far grimmer: the legislature’s initial $750,000 budget ballooned to $2.5 million over two years, with teacher pay funds being raided to cover the shortfall.
This was not an isolated incident. Schwinn’s role in the SPEDx controversy further highlights her willingness to prioritise private profit over public accountability. In Texas, she helped broker a multimillion-dollar no-bid contract with an inexperienced company to manage special education data, a decision that resulted in public outcry and the eventual cancellation of the contract. Yet, Louisiana maintained its partnership with SPEDx, showcasing how these exploitative practices often transcend state lines and accountability mechanisms. These decisions did nothing to benefit the students they were ostensibly designed to help. Instead, they served to line the pockets of corporations while draining resources from already underfunded schools.
Schwinn’s financial ties to TNTP, a company started by Michelle Rhee, offer another window into this systemic looting. In 2021, she signed an $8 million contract with TNTP, conveniently omitting her husband’s employment with the organisation from her financial disclosure forms. This lack of transparency is not incidental—it is emblematic of how “market-driven solutions” operate as a mechanism for privatising public resources. The term itself is steeped in neoliberal ideology, originating as a justification for exploiting so-called developing nations under the guise of economic reform. Today, it has been turned inward, used to cannibalise America’s own public institutions. Schwinn’s manoeuvres demonstrate how this ideology is less about competition or efficiency and more about creating pipelines for wealth extraction, with public schools serving as the latest battleground.
The human cost of Schwinn’s leadership is staggering. Within just ten months of her tenure as Tennessee’s Commissioner of Education, the department experienced 250 resignations. These were not low-level exits but included seasoned staff with decades of institutional knowledge. This exodus reflected not only poor management but also the growing demoralisation of public educators who saw their work being systematically undermined. Teachers and administrators who had dedicated their lives to education were pushed out or marginalised, making way for the corporate vultures circling overhead.
Schwinn’s career exemplifies how “market-driven solutions” are a carefully constructed façade for looting. The stories from Tennessee and beyond reveal the destruction wrought by her leadership—an intentional effort to strip public education of its resources and turn it into yet another profit centre for the wealthy elite. Far from being an aberration, Schwinn is a product of a system designed to exploit, and her career is a chilling preview of what awaits if her nomination is confirmed.
Debunking the Language of "Market-Driven Solutions"
The phrase “market-driven solutions” emerged during the neoliberal ascendancy of the late 20th century, designed as both a justification and a rallying cry for policies that prioritised corporate profit over public welfare. Originating from the ideological framework championed by figures like Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, it served as a euphemistic way to obscure the calculated dismantling of public systems. What it truly represents is not an impartial, inevitable reliance on market forces but a deliberate, ideologically driven agenda to redirect resources from the public sphere into the hands of private interests.
The language of “market-driven solutions” is not accidental; it was crafted and popularised by “think tanks” and policymakers whose ultimate goal was to legitimise the looting of public resources. By framing privatisation and deregulation as “solutions,” it shifts focus away from the power dynamics and exploitation at play, presenting these acts as neutral or even benevolent. In reality, markets are not abstract forces—they are systems engineered and manipulated by those who hold economic power. The phrase hides the drivers behind the wheel, the corporations and individuals actively rigging these systems to maximise their profits whilst minimising accountability.
Penny Schwinn’s career is a perfect illustration of this. The no-bid contracts she oversaw in Tennessee, whether with ClassWallet or SPEDx, were not examples of markets finding the most “efficient” solution. Instead, they were instances of deliberate manipulation, where decisions were made to benefit private companies with little regard for their competence or the consequences for students and teachers. These actions expose the false promise of market-driven policies: rather than fostering competition or innovation, they enable the same small group of private actors to profit from public funds, leaving schools underfunded and communities underserved.
The origins of this language in neoliberal ideology make its usage today even more insidious. Born out of the privatisation waves of the 1980s and 1990s, “market-driven solutions” was used to justify the outsourcing of public goods—whether utilities, transportation, or education—under the guise of “efficiency.” What it delivered was widespread inequality, reduced accountability, and the erosion of public trust in institutions. Now, as this rhetoric is turned inward, targeting domestic public services like education, the consequences are devastating. The same playbook that once extracted resources from colonised nations is being used against the American people, with public education as the latest frontier.
The corporate media’s complicity in this process cannot be ignored. By uncritically parroting phrases like “market-driven solutions” and presenting Schwinn as a “Reading Champion,” they sanitise her track record of enabling looting on a massive scale. These outlets know full well what such policies entail: the dismantling of public systems, the exploitation of marginalised communities, and the enrichment of the few at the expense of the many. The language is a smokescreen, carefully designed to distract from the systemic harm being done and the intentional actors behind it.
It is vital to reject the comforting neutrality of “market-driven solutions” and name it for what it is: a tool of exploitation and profiteering. The phrase does not describe a natural phenomenon or an inevitable outcome—it describes an ideology, a plan, and a weapon wielded by those who prioritise profit above all else. Exposing this reality is the first step toward dismantling the systems that continue to harm public education and the communities it serves.
Connecting Neoliberalism to Neocolonialism
From a outside perspective, both colonialism and neoliberalism are systems of exploitation rooted in the logic of capitalism. Colonialism functions as the forcible extraction of resources, labour, and wealth from colonised territories for the benefit of imperial powers and their capitalist elites. It is not merely about territorial conquest but about economic domination, transforming entire societies into appendages of the capitalist system. Neoliberalism, on the other hand, represents a modern iteration of this logic, turning the mechanisms of the state itself into tools for capital accumulation. By promoting privatisation, deregulation, and the commodification of public goods, neoliberalism extends the colonial playbook inward, targeting domestic populations as new sites for extraction and profit.
The parallels between colonialism’s resource extraction and the neoliberal looting of public institutions are impossible to ignore. Just as colonial powers extracted raw materials and wealth from colonised nations to fuel their capitalist economies, neoliberal policies extract resources from public systems—health care, utilities, and most egregiously, education—and funnel them into private hands. Public schools, once a cornerstone of collective good and a space for fostering equity, have become battlegrounds for profit-driven exploitation. The language may have shifted, with terms like “market-driven solutions” replacing “civilising missions,” but the underlying logic remains unchanged: the prioritisation of private gain over communal well-being.
Penny Schwinn’s career exemplifies this modern neocolonial project. Her actions align with a systemic pattern of stripping public systems for private profit under the guise of innovation and progress. From the no-bid contracts awarded to ClassWallet and SPEDx to her financial entanglements with TNTP, Schwinn has consistently prioritised private interests over the needs of the public. These are not isolated missteps or accidental oversights; they are deliberate acts of extraction, echoing the colonial practice of exploiting the wealth of others while leaving devastation in its wake. In this case, the “wealth” being extracted includes public funds meant for schools, teacher salaries, and resources for students, particularly in marginalised communities.
Schwinn’s role in this process is not that of a rogue operator but of a neocolonial agent, working within a system designed to dismantle public education and commodify it for private gain. Her actions, from funnelling millions into corporate contracts to exacerbating inequality in Title I schools, reflect the broader neoliberal strategy of turning public goods into profit centres. Like colonial administrators of the past, Schwinn operates under a façade of improvement and reform while advancing the interests of capital at the expense of the public good.
By framing Schwinn’s career within this neocolonial logic, it becomes clear that her nomination is not merely about individual failings but about a broader project to weaponise public institutions for capitalist profit. Education, once a space for collective empowerment, is being reduced to yet another frontier for exploitation. To resist this, we must name it for what it is: a continuation of the colonial blueprint, repackaged for the neoliberal age.
Why Resistance Is Necessary
Resistance to Penny Schwinn’s nomination for Deputy Secretary of Education is not just necessary; it is urgent. Her appointment is not an isolated event but part of a broader neoliberal project that has infiltrated public policy for decades, dismantling public systems under the guise of “market-driven solutions.” These policies are not accidental or organic; they are deliberate, designed to enrich corporate interests while leaving communities—particularly marginalised ones—to bear the brunt of the harm. Schwinn is just one cog in this larger neoliberal machine, serving as a polished, palatable face for an agenda that prioritises profit over people. Framed as a “Reading Champion” and “reformer,” she plays the role of the great white hope, a saviour figure whose rhetoric obscures the devastating impact of the policies she represents.
The roots of neoliberalism reveal its true purpose. Born out of the Mont Pelerin Society and carried forward by figures like Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman, neoliberalism rebranded unregulated capitalism as a virtuous force, capable of solving all societal ills. By the 1980s, it had evolved into a political weapon wielded by leaders like Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, stripping away social protections and privatising public goods. Today, neoliberalism targets education, health care, and other vital systems, transforming them into marketplaces for profit extraction. Schwinn’s actions—awarding no-bid contracts, funnelling millions into private corporations, and raiding teacher salaries—are emblematic of this strategy. These are not the actions of a reformer but of a pillager, advancing an agenda designed to hollow out public education.
The stakes for public education could not be higher. If these patterns continue unchecked, schools will become little more than profit centres for corporate interests. Underfunded schools, particularly Title I schools, will see even fewer resources, whilst teachers will face increasing workloads, stagnant pay, and diminishing autonomy. The gap between wealthy and working-class students will widen further, cementing education as yet another domain where inequality thrives. Schwinn’s nomination symbolises this assault on public education, positioning her as the spearhead of an agenda that views schools as opportunities for looting rather than spaces for learning.
But this is about more than education. The neoliberal project Schwinn represents is a systemic attack on the very concept of public good. It reflects a worldview where markets dictate every aspect of life, and communities are left to pick up the pieces. By celebrating figures like Schwinn as “Reading Champions” or saviours, the corporate media not only obscures the harm being done but actively enables it. These narratives are crafted to distract from the reality: Schwinn, far from being a champion for children, is the tip of the spear in a larger campaign of exploitation.
Resistance, then, must begin with exposing the truth. Schwinn’s policies are not reforms—they are acts of looting. Her nomination is not progress—it is a calculated move to entrench neoliberalism further. By naming the harm and rejecting the false saviour narratives, we can begin to reclaim public education as a space for equity and empowerment, not profit and exploitation. This is not just about stopping Schwinn; it is about resisting the entire neoliberal framework that she serves.
A Vision for Education Beyond Neoliberalism
To imagine an education system beyond neoliberalism, we must draw inspiration from the visionaries who championed free public education as a cornerstone of democracy. Leaders like Horace Mann, John Dewey, Mary McLeod Bethune, and W.E.B. Du Bois saw education not as a commodity but as a public good, essential for creating an informed citizenry and fostering equity. Their work reminds us that education has the potential to be a tool for liberation, a space for community-building, and a means to challenge systemic injustices. Reclaiming public education requires us to honour this legacy by prioritising equity, transparency, and deep community involvement over profit and privatisation.
Successful initiatives that resist neoliberalism’s corrosive influence demonstrate what is possible when communities take back control of their schools. Grassroots movements such as those led by United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA) and organisations like Journey for Justice Alliance have fought tirelessly to preserve public schools as spaces of empowerment. These efforts prioritise smaller class sizes, culturally relevant curricula, and increased funding for under-resourced schools. They also reject the harmful logic of competition embedded in charter schools and voucher programs, focusing instead on collaboration and meeting the holistic needs of students and educators. These examples prove that an alternative is not only necessary but achievable.
Marginalised communities—students, parents, and educators from historically underserved backgrounds—must be at the forefront of this fight. They have long borne the brunt of inequitable education policies, from underfunding in Title I schools to systemic racism embedded in curricula and discipline practices. Their lived experiences make them uniquely equipped to identify the real issues facing schools and to lead the charge for meaningful change. Grassroots organising, like the work done by Black Lives Matter at School or the Alliance to Reclaim Our Schools, has shown how powerful this collective leadership can be. These movements challenge the notion that market forces can “save” education, demonstrating instead that solidarity and local control are the real solutions.
Supporting these efforts means more than just rejecting neoliberal policies; it means actively engaging with and investing in alternatives. We must work to reimagine schools as places where students are empowered to think critically, teachers are valued as professionals, and communities are involved in decision-making. This vision, inspired by the champions of public education, calls us to reject the commodification of learning and to reaffirm education as a public good that belongs to everyone. By returning to these foundational principles and centring those most affected, we can rebuild an education system that reflects the values of equity, justice, and community.
Final thoughts …
The nomination of Penny Schwinn for Deputy Secretary of Education is more than a troubling political appointment—it is a signal of what is to come if neoliberal policies continue to dominate public education. Schwinn’s track record is not an aberration; it is emblematic of a system that views schools not as places of learning and equity but as profit centres to be exploited. Her policies, cloaked in the language of “market-driven solutions,” have left a trail of underfunded schools, disempowered teachers, and marginalised communities further entrenched in inequity. Resisting her nomination is not just about opposing one individual—it is about challenging the system she represents.
To move forward, we must begin by naming the looting for what it is. The language of “market-driven solutions” is a carefully constructed façade, designed to distract from the intentional dismantling of public education for private gain. Wherever this rhetoric appears, it must be confronted. These so-called solutions do not serve students or educators; they serve corporate interests. By exposing this reality, we can begin to dismantle the false narratives that enable these policies to thrive.
But naming the harm is only the first step. We must also actively advocate for a vision of education as a public good—one that prioritises equity, transparency, and the well-being of communities over profit. This means investing in public schools, supporting grassroots movements led by those most affected, and rejecting policies that funnel public funds into private hands. It means standing in solidarity with teachers and students who are fighting for a better, fairer education system. Above all, it means reclaiming education as a space of empowerment and possibility, not a tool for capitalist exploitation.
The stakes could not be higher. Public education is one of the last remaining institutions that has the potential to bring people together, foster critical thought, and create opportunities for all. Allowing it to be further eroded by the forces of neoliberalism is not an option. Resisting Schwinn’s nomination is not just about saying no to a harmful appointee—it is about saying yes to a future where education serves everyone, not just the privileged few. Together, we can reject the looting and build an education system that reflects the values of equity, justice, and community. The fight for public education is the fight for a fairer, more equitable world, and it is one we must win.