SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
February, 18 2011, 02:51pm EDT
Contact:
Diane Minor 202.730.7332 | diane.minor@seiu.org
Saving Public Libraries from the Privatization Beast
Privatization Threatens America's Public Libraries and Library Services
WASHINGTON
The public library is an American institution - but right now, it's under threat of being
transformed from a public service to a for-profit venture. SEIU is partnering with community residents, local organizations and librarians to save public libraries from widespread privatization efforts.
To help coordinate their efforts, SEIU has launched the PrivatizationBeast.org campaign to support local community efforts to preserve quality public library services. The first focus will be to support efforts to keep the public library services public at the Santa Clarita library system in Southern California.
Currently, Library Systems and Services (LSSI) is the only private company that offers turnkey private library management in the United States and is often the only company in line to take over a local library system. LSSI has taken over libraries in Oregon, Florida, Tennessee, Texas, Kansas and California and has reduced services and staff while relying on more volunteers to make a profit. As the sole bidder, there is no market and no competition - so there is no "free market" mechanism to improve performance or reduce costs.
Santa Clarita Residents Defend Public Library Services and Local Taxes
The three Santa Clarita libraries are scheduled to be taken over by LSSI beginning July 1, 2011. The decision to privatize the libraries has already cost the city $3 million in unanticipated losses in revenue and additional expenses. On February 14th, a third lawsuit was filed to prevent the LSSI contract from taking effect this year by local residents.
"As a public librarian, I believe that library services should be available to everyone and this can best be done through a strong public library system," said Cindy Singer, SEIU 721
member and Los Angeles County Librarian. "The residents of Santa Clarita did not have a choice or a voice in their Council's decision to privatize their libraries and how their tax dollars are spent. I will be supporting them as they continue to hold their elected officials accountable for their decision."
Stockton California Residents Push Back on Library Privatization and WIN!
On February 8th, the Stockton City Council and San Joaquin Board of Supervisors voted to keep their public libraries from being privatized. Thousands of residents expressed concern about the potential threat and released this statement after the decision to not sign a contract with LSSI was announced.
"Libraries are at the foundation of our democracy. We are proud of our local leaders for saying no to privatizing our public libraries," said Vince Perrin, president of the Friends of
the Stockton Library, and Sylvia Kothe, chair of the Concerned Citizens Coalition, in a joint statement. "We hope that other organizations will stand up and fight against the privatization of public libraries in their communities."
Learn more and take action by visiting https://privatizationbeast.org.
With 2 million members in Canada, the United States and Puerto Rico, SEIU is the fastest-growing union in the Americas. Focused on uniting workers in healthcare, public services and property services, SEIU members are winning better wages, healthcare and more secure jobs for our communities, while uniting their strength with their counterparts around the world to help ensure that workers--not just corporations and CEOs--benefit from today's global economy.
LATEST NEWS
Netanyahu Says 'There Will Be No Palestinian State,' Signing E1 Settlement Agreement
The plan threatens 7,000 Palestinians with forced displacement and would cut East Jerusalem off from the rest of the West Bank.
Sep 12, 2025
With a growing number of countries around the world recognizing Palestinian statehood, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday declared that "there will be no Palestinian state" as he signed an agreement to develop a key settlement in the West Bank—prompting calls for the international community to hold Israel accountable for its illegal occupation and apartheid policies in Palestinian territories.
At an event in the settlement of Maale Adumim, Netanyahu was joined by Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and Construction and Housing Minister Haim Katz as he signed an agreement with the town to develop 3,400 new housing units in the E1 settlement, which has long been stalled due to US opposition.
The Trump administration has reversed that opposition, clearing the way for Israel to link thousands of illegal settlements together and cut off East Jerusalem—which Palestinians have named as the future capital of a Palestinian state—from the rest of the West Bank.
Netanyahu said Thursday that the plan will "double the population" of Israelis in Maale Adumim, which like all of Israel's settlements in the West Bank is illegal under international law. Last year, the International Court of Justice ruled that Israel's occupation of Gaza and the West Bank is illegal and said it was guilty of confiscating "large areas" of Palestinian land for Israeli settlers.
“We are going to fulfill our promise that there will be no Palestinian state. This place belongs to us," said Netanyahu.
As +972 magazine reported Friday, 7,000 Palestinians in the West Bank face forced displacement if the plan moves forward, and north-south travel could become "almost impossible," as the proposed settlement would establish separate roads for Palestinians and Israelis and would divert Palestinian drivers from Route 1 onto a bypass.
The town of Ezariyah, where many current residents travel frequently for shopping and other daily needs, "would become a geographically isolated island," Mohammad Mattar, a member of the town's municipality, told +972. "The road will cut right against people’s homes, leaving no room for natural expansion, and the town will lose thousands of dunams of land. This will force many residents to leave and deal a devastating economic blow.”
Mattar said that 112 demolition orders have already been issued for homes, shops, factories, and farmland.
"Some businesses have already evacuated and cut their losses, while others are waiting," he said. "It will force many residents to leave, particularly Jerusalemites who have built their lives and livelihoods around the town."
On Thursday, the Israeli anti-settlement watchdog Peace Now reported that it had prepared billboards denouncing the E1 plan to display in Maale Adumim during Netanyahu's event, but Mayor Guy Yifrah blocked them from being displayed.
In addition to "burying" the possibility of a Palestinian state, as Smotrich said last month, "the annexation led by Smotrich and Netanyahu will bury Israel," Peace Now said.
Nabil Abu Rudeineh, presidential spokesperson for the Palestinian Authority (PA) in the West Bank, told Al Jazeera that a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital is "inevitable" regardless of Netanyahu's agreement to the E1 plan.
Rudeineh noted that 149 United Nations member states have recognized Palestinian statehood, with the number jumping in recent months as countries including France and Ireland have announced their recognition, and called on other countries to do the same to increase pressure on Netanyahu to back off the E1 plan.
"As more governments recognize a Palestinian state, it makes it harder for Netanyahu to proceed with his preferred options—mass expulsion (no Palestinians for a state) or endless apartheid (oppressive occupation with no state)," said Kenneth Roth, former executive director of Human Rights Watch, last week.
Inès Abdel Razek, executive director of the Palestine Institute for Public Diplomacy, told +972 that with Israel starving the people of Gaza with its blockade on humanitarian aid and slaughtering more than 64,000 Palestinians there so far since beginning its bombardment of the exclave nearly two years ago while also stepping up violence in the West Bank, the recognition of a Palestinian state by individual countries is "increasingly irrelevant."
"The most we can say about the fact that governments choose recognition as a measure right now, in the midst of a genocide that needs to end, is that it is really too little, too late," she told +972. "What governments should be doing, not only as a moral obligation, but as a political and legal obligation under international law, is to end the genocide and the occupation, and to hold Israel accountable."
"For the PA, recognition is a victory," said Abdel Razek. "But if you look on the ground, there is little resembling a Palestinian state... What does exist are Palestinians themselves, fighting to remain on their land and to see their fundamental right to self-determination fulfilled."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Omar Brings War Powers Resolution After Trump Bombed Boat in Caribbean With 'No Legal Justification'
"It was not self-defense or authorized by Congress," the Minnesota congresswoman said of Trump's strike on a boat bound from Venezuela, which killed 11 people last week.
Sep 12, 2025
US Rep. Ilhan Omar introduced a war powers resolution in the US House of Representatives on Thursday, seeking to restrain President Donald Trump from conducting attacks in the Caribbean after he ordered a drone strike on a ship from Venezuela last week, killing 11 people.
The Trump administration has claimed, with little evidence, that the boat was a drug trafficking vessel that posed an imminent threat to the United States. But that narrative has come increasingly into doubt in recent days.
In a statement on the resolution provided to The Intercept, Omar (D-Minn.) said:
There was no legal justification for the Trump administration’s military escalation in the Caribbean... It was not self-defense or authorized by Congress. That is why I am introducing a resolution to terminate hostilities against Venezuela, and against the transnational criminal organizations that the administration has designated as terrorists this year. All of us should agree that the separation of powers is crucial to our democracy, and that only Congress has the power to declare war.
Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution gives Congress the "sole authority to declare war," but presidents have often carried out military actions without congressional approval, citing their role as commander-in-chief of the armed forces, particularly since the passage of the Authorization for Use of Military Force in 2001.
The War Powers Act of 1973 allows Congress to check the president's war-making authority, requiring the president to report military actions to Congress within 48 hours and requiring Congress to authorize the deployment of troops after 60 days.
Omar unveiled the resolution alongside several of her fellow members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, including Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) and caucus whip Rep. Jesús “Chuy” García (D-Ill.).
"Donald Trump cannot be allowed to drag the United States into another endless war with his reckless actions," Casar said. "It is illegal for the president to take the country to war without consulting the people's representatives, and Congress must vote now to stop Trump from putting us at further risk."
In the days following Trump's strike on the ship, the administration's narrative that it contained members of Venezuela's Tren de Aragua gang bound for the United States has been called into question by news reports and by those briefed by the Department of Defense, which the Trump administration recently rebranded as the "Department of War."
After his staff was briefed on Tuesday, Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told CNN that the Pentagon has "offered no positive identification that the boat was Venezuelan, nor that its crew were members of Tren de Aragua or any other cartel."
While Trump has stated that the boat was en route to the US, the briefers themselves acknowledged that they could not determine its destination. Secretary of State Marco Rubio contradicted the president, saying "these particular drugs were probably headed to Trinidad or some other country in the Caribbean, at which point they just contribute to the instability these countries are facing."
The New York Times, meanwhile, reported Wednesday that the boat "had altered its course and appeared to have turned around before the attack started," which further contradicts the claim of imminent harm to the US.
“There is no evidence—none—that this strike was conducted in self-defense," Reed said. "That matters, because under both domestic and international law, the US military simply does not have the authority to use lethal force against a civilian vessel unless acting in self-defense.”
Even if the people aboard the boat were carrying drugs, as the administration claims, there is no legal precedent for the crime of drug trafficking justifying such an extraordinary use of military retaliation.
The White House has attempted to argue that the president has the legal authority to summarily kill suspected drug smugglers using an unprecedented legal rationale, which labels cartel members as tantamount to enemy combatants, who are allowed to be killed in war, because the product they carry causes thousands of deaths per year in the US. Legal analysts have described this as a flimsy pretext for extrajudicial murder.
Scott R. Anderson, a senior fellow in the National Security Law Program at Columbia Law School and a former legal adviser at the US State Department, wrote for the Lawfare blog:
There is no colorable statutory authority for military action against Tren de Aragua and other similarly situated groups. Occasional suggestions in the press that the Trump administration’s description of Tren de Aragua as a terrorist organization is meant to invoke the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) are almost certainly mistaken: That authorization extends only to the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks and select associates, and no one—not even in the Trump administration—has accused Tren de Aragua of being that.
Marty Lederman, who served as deputy assistant attorney general in the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel from 2009 to 2010, wrote for Just Security:
Regardless of which laws might have been broken, what’s more alarming, and of greater long-term concern, is that U.S. military personnel crossed a fundamental line the Department of Defense has been resolutely committed to upholding for many decades—namely, that (except in rare and extreme circumstances not present here) the military must not use lethal force against civilians, even if they are alleged, or even known, to be violating the law."
The resolution introduced by Omar is the first seeking to restrain Trump's ability to launch military strikes against Venezuela. But it's not the first seeking to rein in his wide-ranging use of unilateral warmaking authority.
In June, following his launch of airstrikes against Iran, war powers resolutions introduced in the House and Senate to limit Trump's actions in the Middle East narrowly failed despite receiving some Republican support.
Though specific attempts to rein in Trump's power have failed, the House did pass a bipartisan resolution earlier this week to repeal the AUMFs issued by Congress in the lead-up to the Iraq War, and which presidents have used for over two decades to justify a wide range of military actions across the Middle East without congressional oversight.
If passed, Omar's measure would require Trump to obtain congressional approval before using military force against Venezuela or launching more strikes on transnational criminal organizations that he has designated as terrorist groups since February, including Tren de Aragua.
García, the Progressive Caucus whip, said the resolution was an effort to begin restoring Congress' authority to check a president operating with impunity.
"The extrajudicial strike against a vessel in the Caribbean Sea is only the most recent of Trump’s reckless, deadly, and illegal military actions. Now, he’s lawlessly threatening a region already profoundly impacted by the destabilization of U.S. actions,” said García. "With this War Powers Resolution, we emphasize the total illegality of his action, and— consistent with overwhelming public opposition to forever war—reclaim Congress' sole power to authorize military action.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
FBI Names 22-Year-Old Tyler Robinson as Charlie Kirk Murder Suspect
Law enforcement sources subsequently told CNN that "the suspect in the murder of Charlie Kirk confessed to his father that he was the shooter."
Sep 12, 2025
This is a developing story... Please check back for possible updates...
Republican Utah Gov. Spencer Cox announced on Friday that 22-year-old Utah resident Tyler Robinson had been arrested as the suspect in the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.
Cox said that Robinson was apprehended after being turned in by his family after he allegedly confessed to murdering Kirk on Wednesday.
The Utah governor also elaborated on some of the engravings that were found on bullet casings that were found on the scene. One of the messages, claimed Cox, said, "Hey fascist! Catch!" while another had the words: "If you read this you are gay lmao."
US President Donald Trump was the first to assert Friday morning that law enforcement officials have apprehended a suspect in the murder of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.
During an appearance on "Fox & Friends," the president said that he believed "with a high degree of certainty" that law enforcement had the suspect in custody.
"I just heard about it five minutes before I walked in, as I'm walking in, they said, 'Looking real good,' they have the person they wanted," he said. "So you have breaking news, don't you?"
Trump: "I just heard about it five minutes before I walked in ... they have the person that they wanted. So you have breaking news, don't you eh? You always have breaking news, Ainsley. Sean's gonna be very disappointed that we're not doing it on his show." pic.twitter.com/0mBjZk0sNR
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 12, 2025
Trump also said that a person who knew the suspect provided information on him to law enforcement officials that led to his arrest, although he offered no details. He said that the FBI would likely make an announcement on the suspect later on Friday.
Shortly after Trump made this announcement, law enforcement sources gave CNN some additional details that seemingly corroborated Trump's claims about having a suspect in custody.
"The suspect in the murder of Charlie Kirk confessed to his father that he was the shooter," wrote CNN's Kristen Holmes in a social media post. "His father told authorities and secured his son until they could arrive to pick him up."
While much remains unclear, several outlets—including NBC News, The Daily Beast, New York Post, and others—identified the individual in custody as a 22-year-old with the name Tyler Robinson. Many of the other details surrounding the individual's arrest could not be independently verified by Common Dreams.
In the hours after Kirk's assassination, law enforcement officials took two people into custody, only for those people to be released shortly after officials determined they had nothing to do with the killing.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular