Why Is Andy Stern Helping John McCain?

( Cross posted at Openleft.com )

With all the attention that SEIU has received over rampant corruption in its largest California local, 6434 formerly headed by the disgraced Tyrone Freeman, and Michigan’s largest healthcare Union also formerly headed by, yet again another disgraced leader (Rickman Jackson), and now most recently the resignation of one of Mr. Sterns newly elected top International Vice-Presidents, Anelle Grajeda, for diverting members dues to her former boy friend, one must ask the question: “who does Andy Stern really support for President?” At first glance at the current situation with SEIU Andy Stern’s pick as our next President may seem unrelated to the corruption within SEIU. That is, until you examine closely how Mr. Stern has acted upon the alleged corruption within SEIU.

Instead of aggressively pursuing all available remedies to rid the corruption within the aforementioned SEIU locals and getting back to the business of electing a pro-worker candidate he has instead chosen to expend the vast majority of SEIU’s resources in a personal vendetta against arguably one of SEIU’s most successful union locals, SEIU-UHW West.

Why? Because SEIU-UHW West dared to hold Stern and his “Team” accountable for the inherent promise that SEIU be of the members, by the members, and for the members.

SEIU-UHW West has engaged Stern for close to 3 years in an internal debate over union governance that has challenged the destructive direction Stern has moved SEIU towards. SEIU-UHW West attempted to sound the alarm during the recent SEIU convention in Puerto Rico by bringing to the floor measures that would have ensured and preserved member governance, oversight, and participation at the highest levels of SEIU.

Unfortunately, Stern and his “Team” choreographed a textbook campaign that vilified SEIU-UHW West’s platform as centric only to the needs of SEIU-UHW West and devoid of any conscience for the plight of unorganized workers. He stated that SEIU-UHW West was only interested “in polishing their apples”. Nothing was further from the truth. In fact the platform put forward by SEIU-UHW West expanded the powers of its members and was a threat to Stern’s lust for control, power, and centralization of decision making within SEIU.

Second only to 1199 NY in its COPE contributions (member voluntary political fund) to the International, the leader in California COPE dollars by double the states locals average, and the fastest growing local in SEIU, SEIU-UHW West, instead of being utilized by Stern to ensure that we elect a President sensitive to the needs of the working class, is instead under a vicious and completely baseless attack from Stern and his appointed henchmen and surrogates that includes a threatened trusteeship on false charges of financial mismanagement.

It is important to note that this is Stern’s second bite at this apple. The international recently had their proverbial heads handed to them in the highest court in California on this very issue. The court ruled that the International had no basis for their claims and dismissed all relevant claims made by SEIU with prejudice. Put simply, the court told Stern and his “Team” not to ever bring this frivolous matter before the court again. So now Stern wants to drag SEIU-UHW West thru the mud in an attempt to discredit them as well as distract attention away from the more serious previously mentioned malfeasance (and long known by Stern) of his handpicked appointees, Tyrone Freeman, Rickman Jackson, Annelle Grajeda.

With so much at stake in this years election one must wonder why a personal vendetta against SEIU-UHW West is the highest priority for Mr. Stern. At the SEIU convention in Puerto Rico this year, delegates endured wave after wave of self righteous indignation opposing SEIU-UHW West’s desire to debate internal jurisdictional issues. At stake was the very essence of what it meant to be a healthcare worker; the ability to advocate on behalf of patients, better staffing, improvements in working conditions, and the right to choose in a fair and democratic process what union local to be represented by.

Stern surrogates and appointees made statements calling SEIU-UHW’s arguments selfish and self-serving. One even stated, “People are dying right now as we waste time debating these issues. We have work to do! Let’s get to work!” Staffers from the SEIU continued to echo this same tired line at nausea throughout the debate process.

Certainly the work of electing a progressive pro-working class president falls into the category of “work to do”. And if it does why, with the incredible political fight before us, would Andy Stern sideline his second biggest political weapon against four more years of Bush’s failed policies in order to carry out a personal vendetta against SEIU-UHW West? Stern has time and again issued the battle cry against corporate greed, affirmed his commitment to lift workers out of poverty, and boldly stated that SEIU will lead the battle to get universal healthcare and pass perhaps one of the most ambitious pieces of legislation ensuring workers rights to organize (EFCA).

So it defies logic that at the most critical time in the election process, where so many peoples lives depend on the outcome, Mr. Stern would allow himself to be consumed with forcing a trusteeship upon a union local that has a long and proven history of, not only adhering to the values he claims to hold dearly but, excelling at those same values. And why would Mr. Stern schedule the Trusteeship hearing, not only during the most critical time of the general election but on the exact same dates (September 26-27) that the Obama campaign is attempting to mobilize California supporters to participate in a canvassing effort in neighboring “swing state” Nevada, where Obama trails McCain by 1 percentage point? It begs the question, who ultimately wins if Mr. Stern allows himself to take action against a union local who has the power to help end eight years of failed economic and foreign policies? And whose’ hopes ultimately die if we fail?

Andy Stern prides himself in being a leader in the progressive majority movement. However his current actions fly in the face of his alleged progressive values. He is jeopardizing real reform in our labor movement to fulfill a personal grudge. These are hardly the qualities of a true progressive and reformer and certainly not the qualities that will bring hope and “Justice For All”.

UPDATED – see this video coverage of our march into the SEIU International officials’ secret meeting.

Today, myself and 5,000 other UHW members from all over the state are in Manhattan Beach to protest. But we’re not protesting another corrupt boss. We’re protesting a process rigged by SEIU International officials designed to take away the voices of 65,000 long-term care workers in California.

What’s this all about? It’s about whether SEIU, our union, will stand on the principles of democracy and be governed by its members, or whether Washington D.C. union officials will force us into another union, against our wishes and against our vote. We are here to say clearly: we are not to be moved around like pieces of furniture. We won’t be forced out of our union against our will.

In the past, we have been critical of SEIU leaders in D.C. meeting behind closed doors to cut deals that hurt healthcare workers. But now we’ve seen it in action.

Yesterday, top SEIU International officers were meeting here, behind closed doors, to plot to cut our union, UHW, in half by forcing nursing home and homecare workers (like me) away from hospital workers.

Why wasn’t our union invited to the meeting? Is it because we have already voted by 97% to stay in UHW? Is it because we oppose agreements like the California Nursing Home Alliance, which trades away worker rights and limits our ability to advocate for residents?

We wanted to find out. So a group of more than 20 of us rank-and-file members of UHW decided to let these leaders know we opposed their backroom dealing and that we were prepared to fight to stay united in UHW.

It happened very fast. We walked into their secret meeting, and we told them that we weren't going anywhere, that we had already voted for and chosen our union. Another coworker of mine said that it made no sense for us to move, since we had achieved much better contracts in UHW, where all kinds of healthcare workers are together, than the other union they want to move us to.

The union officials sat there stone-faced. I don’t know if they were shocked or if they didn’t care what we thought. The only one who said anything was Anna Burger, Secretary-Treasurer. She tried to shut me up, but I kept on going, addressing the rest of the room. I told them that we, the members, are the union. We are not for sale, we can't be given away like a piece of furniture.

In the end, once we’d made our message clear, we left. Today the hearing officially begins, but the backroom meeting leads us to believe the decision has already been written. But that won’t stop us.

We will continue this reform movement to make SEIU a democratic union. For us, our union is not just about wages, it’s not just about benefits, it’s about democracy.  

The New York Times and Wall St. Journal both cover the incredible events at Saturday’s Labor Notes conference in Michigan, where Andy Stern of SEIU International sent busload of male staffers to chase and harass RNs from the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee, in retaliation for CNA/NNOC defeating them in a controversial “company union” vote last month in Ohio.  Fortunately the targeted RNs were able to escape out a back door, but other conference-goers were not so lucky, with one woman sent to the hospital, and others punched, kicked, slapped, and shoved

This is obviously a dark day for the labor movement.  Andy Stern needs to learn that this kind of harassment of women is NEVER okay. And it is NEVER, EVER okay to orchestrate an action that is so stressful that members have a heart attack and die.

RNs will never forget this day, nor is it now likely that any RN in the country will want to organize with SEIU after this kind of display.

As a first step, Andy Stern needs to apologize to all involved, pay the hospital bills of the injured woman, and promise to never use violence again.  Instead, shamefully, SEIU is going back and forth between denying the violence and attempting to justify it.  You can watch first-person accounts from some of the RNs targeted for harassment.

You really need to go look at the picture, but The New York Times writes:

       “The A.F.L.-C.I.O. president, John J. Sweeney, denounced on Tuesday what he said was “a violent attack orchestrated” by the Service Employees International Union against members of other unions at a conference on Saturday in Michigan.

The service employees’ union sent busloads of members from Ohio to the labor conference in Dearborn to confront leaders and members of the California Nurses Association. The service employees say the nurses sabotaged a major service employees’ unionizing drive last month.

Others at the conference said the fighting began when service employee members and officials tried to barge into the conference in a hotel banquet hall. Chris Kutalik, editor of Labor Notes, a magazine sponsoring the conference, said a retired member of the United Automobile Workers was pushed, banged her head against a table and was taken to a hospital for a head wound.

“There is no justification, none, for the violent attack orchestrated by S.E.I.U.,” Mr. Sweeney said in a statement. “Violence in attacking freedom of speech must be strongly condemned.”

Today’s Wall St. Journal takes their own look, at SEIU’s attack (reg. req’d)

       “On Saturday, a scuffle broke out between members of the SEIU and participants in a labor solidarity conference in Detroit at which the executive director of the California Nurses Association was scheduled to speak. One attendee was sent to the hospital after cutting her head on a table, according to Chris Kutalik, editor of the magazine Labor Notes, which organized the conference.

Rose Ann DeMoro, executive director of the 66,000-member nurses’ association, decided not to appear at the conference because of tensions between the unions. “Our folks are extremely upset about what happened,” she said. “This is a nasty campaign.”

Mr. Sweeney condemned the confrontation. “There is no justification — none — for the violent attack orchestrated by SEIU,” he said in a statement. Mr. Sweeney called on leaders of both unions to meet to resolve their differences.”

Andy Stern attempted to destroy the labor movement n 2005 by splitting the AFL-CIO, he is undermining the progressive labor movement with series of corporate partnerships you can learn more about here, and now his actions threaten to hurt the reputation of every labor union.  Here’s why Andy needs to apologize and make restitution.

       “More significantly, such fighting could tarnish the image of unions, which have been trying to stem the decline in membership and attract more workers, say labor experts.”

Andy Stern must apologize and make things right.

As I read Andy Stern’s rather verbose diatribe entitled “Just Us” or “Justice for All” I couldn’t help think of how eerily reminiscent Stern’s thought process was to the assertion put forward by President George Bush to the world leaders at large that “You’re either with us or you’re against us”.

Mr. Stern would like us to believe that there are only two distinct questions before us with respect to the direction the SEIU and the Labor Movement can move. The first is to “pursue” what he has characterized as the “Just Us” unionism that seeks only to protect and strengthen current organized workers at the expense of those workers who also would benefit from union membership. Or, as he purports to champion, do we pursue the “Justice for All” approach that “focuses on building a broader movement that improves the living standards and working conditions for all those who have no union…?”

This argument is as flawed and devoid of a broader thought process as President Bush’s argument for unilaterally attacking a sovereign nation was. Like President Bush, Mr. Stern streamlines the issues before us into an overly simplistic choice of good versus evil.

He states that, “This is not an intellectual exercise.” On that I can and do agree. I believe very little intellectual exercise on the part of Mr. Stern was performed before presenting his arguments; otherwise a more detailed and varied list of options might have been presented.

The truth is we do not, as Mr. Stern suggests, have two separate choices before us. In reality, Mr. Stern is excising current members from a fair and democratic process in self-determination while championing a position that allows for an employer friendly way of organizing workers. He as much as says so in the following excerpts from his position paper:

“true worker democracy cannot exist until the 90 percent of workers in America who have no voice gain a union.”

This statement clearly establishes Mr. Stern’s view that we do not currently have a legitimate form of democracy within SEIU and therefore his actions attempting to crush the current reform movement are somehow justified.

What Mr. Stern is attempting to accomplish would be the equivalent of taking away every citizens right to vote until everyone over the age of 18 has registered to vote. The 90 percent worker threshold he defines as the benchmark for a “true worker democracy” gives him and other like-minded leaders an indefinite time period in which to further degrade member governance and oversight. Stern goes on to argue that:

“Was America a true democracy when women or African Americans had no vote

and more than half the population was excluded from the process?”

While it is irrefutable that the history of our democracy was morally repugnant in that it excluded African Americans and women, our country did not evolve to a more fair democracy (true or otherwise) by encroaching on the rights of those who already possessed the freedom to vote. Quite the contrary, our democracy evolved and continues to evolve today by becoming more inclusive in nature. Democracy by its very nature must expand and evolve to survive. Furthermore, African Americans and Women didn’t wake up one morning with the right to vote. There was a long and bloody struggle that lead America to reform its position on voting rights.

And the struggle for social equality continues today. We have a female and African American running for the highest office in the land and yet nobody would fool them selves into believing that if either one is elected to the Presidency that we could declare that we have leveled the socio-economic playing field for women and African Americans or any other group of Americans. But what we can claim is that by including more and more people into the process we come that much closer to a “true democracy”.

Unfortunately under the leadership of Mr. Stern SEIU is moving further and further away from this model of inclusiveness and more towards an Oligarchy in which he directs. Many will say we are already there as more and more union locals are consolidated into larger ones and power is wrested from members by the appointed few.

In reality, Stern’s arguments are, at best, a thinly veiled disguise to tie the SEIU-UHW West member driven reform movement and its platform for change within the SEIU to a long ago abandoned union practice of protecting current union members at the expense of non-union workers, when in fact the members who seek reform are doing the exact opposite.

One needs only to compare the SEIU’s “Justice for All” proposals, which lack any substantive details, to the SEIU-UHW West’s member driven “Platform For Change” which outlines in detail its vision for member rights and democracy, but also has a clear and ambitious vision for bringing more workers into the ranks of the organized.

Conversely the SEIU’s “Justice for All”, in reality, is an oxymoron. Its narrow focus of emphasizing organizing the unorganized at the expense of current members and member democracy is two dimensional, lacks vision, creativity, and underestimates the will and commitment of SEIU’s current members.

It presupposes that there can only be one focused approach to growing our union strength; and that put simply is that we can’t do both organizing and strengthening current member contracts.

That is a position of weakness and the end result, no matter how many members are brought into SEIU, will create a national employer union that addresses very little of the workers concerns and pacifies employer fears over any employee voice in the workplace.

The greatest proponents of having a union in the workplace are the current members who have set the high standards they enjoy and, unfortunately, have become the focus of criticism by the SEIU under the leadership of Mr. Stern for wanting to enjoy the fruits of their labor and their successes. Mr. Stern has stated that current members of SEIU-UHW West are only concerned with “polishing their apple”. This defies logic as SEIU-UHW West members have actively participated, often on their free time, in organizing efforts at the national level that have helped to secure union representation for workers in Florida, Texas, Nevada and other states including active campaigns in Colorado. Additionally, millions of dollars from dues goes directly to SEIU for national organizing campaigns.

On top of that, even with SEIU’s relentless attacks against UHW West, UHW West continues to organize workers in California with close to 2,000 healthcare workers in 4 different elections from Southern California to Northern California voting overwhelmingly to join UHW West in the last 2 ½ weeks alone.

UHW West may in fact be polishing apples. They may even be sinking their teeth deep into them and savoring the sweet juice of success, but they are also telling other workers about those apples and helping them to sow their own seeds that they too may enjoy the fruits of their labor and that is truly “Justice for All”. The vision that Mr. Stern has, that continues to shrink the power and decision making into the hands of a very few, is not “Justice for All”.  Under close scrutiny it is really “Justice for All of us here in D.C.”

Michael Rivera, R.C.P.

Perinatal-Pediatric Specialist

Executive Board Vice-President SEIU-UHW West

I've been pretty quiet about the raging battle in SEIU since the WTF is up with SEIU series a few months (here, here, and here) ago.  In the interim, SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West (UHW) and its president, Sal Rosselli, has resigned from the executive board committee of SEIU.  And they launched a website with lots of information on why that happened: seiuvoice.org.

I advise you to read Rosselli's resignation letter(PDF), and to check out a video debate on DemocracyNOW! between Rosselli and Dave Regan, an e-board member of SEIU. Sal frames it in this way:

I resigned because a series of events that happened the last several weeks, culminating two-and-a-half years of struggle with inside SEIU, fundamental difference in ideology and direction. And the easiest way I can describe it is bottom-up versus top-down, empowering workers to be in control of their lives, in control of their relationship with their employer versus centralizing control and power among a few in Washington, D.C. to control the resources and decision-making authority relationship with these employers. DemocracyNow!

In the past, Rosselli has hinted around the edges at this dispute. It was apparent at the UHW Leadership Conference that I attended a few months back that UHW preferred a model that was based on empowering workers from the very ground level on up. There was discussion of democracy and enabling everybody to have a say in their union. I can't say to what extent these ideals are actualized, but I will say that there was a profound feeling of agreement for those words in the conference center.

It's been no secret that Andy Stern desires a more powerful union, and a larger say in national and international politics for his union and his coalition. The question that has remained with Stern is whether that was about Stern or whether that was about the worker in general.  Well, Matt Smith of the SF Weekly comes out swinging at Stern today:

In the storyline of the current U.S. labor movement — as depicted in piles of Stern magazine profiles — Rosselli is the kind of old-fashioned leader that history might forget. But it's Stern's cheap-trick “modernization” that should be left in the dust.

Follow me over the flip.   

There is a long history here, between Smith, Stern and Rosselli. Smith has been covering the simmering debate between the two leaders, but until now it was quiet.  That has changed now, but the writing has been on the wall for a while.  It was simply a matter of time until this happened.  An example? Well, Smith cites the nursing home contracts signed in 2004:

This view has been challenged by the specific details of Stern's supposed “modernizing” labor deals. A nursing home pact (first described in SF Weekly's 2004 story) between the union and home operators took away the right of patients and their families to sue those operators in cases where patients are injured, raped, or killed. Subsequent contracts obtained by SF Weekly showed these deals stifled workers' free speech rights while also curbing their ability to earn decent pay. Rosselli had previously privately criticized these agreements within the union while giving them tacit public support. Last week he made his criticisms public, creating the first credible rebellion against Stern's leadership.

Of course, it would be foolhardy to think that the contracts or one decision of the SEIU E-board brought this  all about. Rather, there has been a burgeoning battle between Stern and a small group of SEIU leaders who feel that Stern has emphasized growth over securing benefits for their existing workers. In orther words, selling out the loyal customer to grab the new one off the street.

There are arguments to be made on every which side of this debate, and Dave Regan, when he can break himself away from personally attacking Rosselli, presents a little summary of Stern's argument:

What Sal is really upset about is that there was a difference of opinion in California. You know, Sal’s view didn’t always carry the day, and then when other people act legitimately as a result of a collective decision-making process, but sometimes not the way Sal would like to see, you know, we get this kind of conduct. So I think it’s just categorically untrue. It’s unfortunate. And Andy deserves better, and our union deserves better from someone like Sal, who is himself an insider at the highest levels of SEIU. DemocracyNow!

 This is an argument that will rage on, with likely no victor in the immediate future. But, if you're eager to learn more, check out the SEIU Voice website, or one of the many articles about the tiff you can find on Google News.  It just might be an argument that will determine the long-term success of the union movement.

kos has a statement from Change to Win.

Change to Win had a general consulting contract with Chris Lehane. That contract was terminated upon discovery of his role supporting the studios in the writers guild strike. As you know, Change to Win and its affiliates stand solidly behind the writers in their struggle for fairness, so we did not think twice about this decision.

That means Lehane has lost two contracts thus far: SEIU Local 99 and Change to Win.

Change to Win includes SEIU, Teamsters, UNITE-HERE and the Laborers.

Suicide Girls is claiming that the contract Chris Lehane has with AMPTP is worth $100,000.

The studios hired Fabiani & Lehane, at a crisis fee of around $100,000 a month, to battle the WGA members driven PR machine. They did so early in the week, which was another telling sign that they had no intention of making a deal. You don’t need “crisis PR” when you are doing the right thing. You hire “crisis PR” when you are going to walk out of talks and blame the other side for ruining Christmas. So, Lehane and Fabiani, longtime Democratic PR guys, have decided to switch sides and do some union busting. I guess they have come a long way since 2002.

No idea yet if they have lost more than they gained by signing this contract with AMPTP.

Jane Hamsher has the scoop over at Fire Dog Lake.

SEIU Local 99 in Los Angeles — education workers who include teacher’s aids, cafeteria workers and crossing guards — have fired former Clinton spokesman Chris Lehane from a consulting contract in support of the WGA .

“By the end of the week, I believe Chris Lehane will have no union clients because of his work for the AMPTP,” says SEIU President Andy Stern, who confirms that all Change to Win Unions are severing ties with Lehane. “His days are numbered in the labor movement.”

Chris Lehane by opting to go to work for the studios made a choice between that contract and those from labor.  SEIU has been working to support the writers, so it comes as no surprise that they are the first to fire him.  The question now is how quickly the other unions follow suit.  As noted here back in October, the California Labor Federation hired Lehane to work on health care reform, outside of the IOHC coalition.  I do not know what other unions he is under contract with, though we should hopefully find out soon.

While Stern is not my favorite right now, given his meddling in health care and a power struggle at the SEIU State Council that Brian has documented, this is a very strong and useful statement by him.

See also kos on Chris Lehane being fired by Local 99.

UPDATE by Dave on the flip:

UPDATE: Lehane probably has a place waiting for him at Bush’s Department of Labor:

Political operatives in the Department of Labor are using federal reporting requirements to undermine trade unions and conduct a “political misinformation campaign” against them, a report released yesterday charges.

While the Bush administration has generally relaxed federal regulations, the department’s Office of Labor-Management Standards has done the reverse, beefing up disclosure rules, staff and investigations of union leaders and members, the study by the left-leaning Center for American Progress said.

The study criticized the reporting requirements as designed to overwhelm unions with paperwork and trick them into noncompliance. It also accused the office of inflating the number of criminal cases involving union leaders and members.

The report was triggered by the office’s latest requirement, new conflict-of-interest reports that, as of Jan. 1, would require a broad pool of union members to attest that even their car loans do not constitute a potential conflict.

The head hatchet man in the office right now is Don Todd, who came up with the Willie Horton ad.  Come on, Lehane, you can be dirtier than him!

[UPDATE] by Julia. Courtesy of Trapper John over at dkos remember this Grover Norquist quote.

Every dollar that is spent [by labor unions] on disclosure and reporting is a dollar that can’t be spent on other labor union activities.

A few odds and ends that I wanted to post:

• From the diary of  “EthicsinCongress”, Charlie Brown (the good guy) will be be “debating” John “15%” Doolittle (the, well, corrupt guy) tonight at 7:30.  It will be streamed live over a complex series of tubes that we know as the Internets on News10.net.  The format seems more like something straight out of Oprah rather than a “debate”, but what can you do?  What’s the deal with these bizarre debate formats.  Why can’t we all just do good ol’ fashioned Lincoln-Douglas debates.  Oh right, that entails knowing a lot of facts and the hard work of preparation.  Wouldn’t want that, now would we?
• Over in my diary with the “Good Ideas” video, “Peter the Bellhop” and I are having a little conversation on Prop 77.  Feel free to join in…
• Andy Stern, the president of the SEIU, will be in the state promoting his new book, A Country That Works.  He’s something of the rock star among labor leaders, and is very charismatic.  I’ve posted the California event dates on the flip, or you can check his book website event page. Buy A Country That Works here.
• Spending on Prop 87, the oil tax/alternative energy initative, has set a new record.  Accourding to the San-Diego Union-Trib spending is currently at $105 million.  And there’s still 4 weeks left.  Whoa!  But I suppose this isn’t surprising given Stephen Bing’s resources and the oil company’s resources.  Couldn’t they just have given all this money to alternative energy research and be done.  $100 million makes a lot of solar panels.  Nonetheless, we fight on.  87 is a good idea and worthy of passage.  You can bet Chevron won’t back down.

Andy Stern CA Book Tour dates

10/11
8:00pm – 9:30pm
Drinking Liberally @ Molly Mahlone’s
575 South Fairfax
Los Angeles, CA

10/12
12:00pm – 1:30pm
Dean Forum
3502 Watt Way, LA Room 207 “Annenberg Rm�
Los, Angeles, CA

10/18
6:00pm – 8:00pm
2221 Broadway at Grand
Oakland, CA

10/19
12:00pm – 1:30pm
Working Assets Lunch and Book Signing
101 Market St, 1st flr
San Francisco, CA

10/19
7:00pm – 8:30pm
Cody’s Bookstore
2 Stockton Street at Market
San Francisco, CA

10/19
8:30pm – 10:00pm
Drinking Liberally @ House of Shields
39 New Montgomery
San Francisco, CA