Published: Sunday, October 3, 2010
Taking sides / Initiative 1100
Yes: The responsible choice for state liquor reform
Initiative 1100 is the responsible way to get state government out of the liquor business. Selling liquor is not an essential government service, and if we’re ever going to start reforming government, I-1100 is the place to start.
Our state Liquor Control Board has a conflict of interest in selling alcohol while at the same time being responsible for enforcing alcohol laws. The LCB now has 800 employees dedicated to sales and only about 80 employees dedicated to retail enforcement.
Instead, the liquor board is focused on sales and has jacked up the markup on liquor over the years to an outrageous 51.9 percent in addition to state taxes. This is essentially another tax — but a hidden tax, raised with little public attention — that has made our liquor the most expensive in the country and helped push honest consumers outside Washington for their liquor purchases, costing the state millions of dollars a year in tax revenue.
I-1100 throws out this 51.9 percent markup, takes the Liquor Control Board out of the sales business and allows it to focus on what it should have focused on all along: enforcement. The liquor board will be able to devote more time, staff and money to making sure liquor stays out of the hands of underage drinkers.
Thousands of small businesses like mine across the state support I-1100 because it will give a vital boost to our economy and end Prohibition-era restrictions that favor beer distributors and hurt consumers and the public good. Among our supporters are the Washington Restaurant Association, which represents 5,000 restaurants across the state; the Family Wineries of Washington State, which represents 100 small, family-owned wineries; and the Association of Washington Business, which includes 7,000 members representing 650,000 employees. Beyond these associations, many individual businesses — restaurants, grocery stores and wineries among them — support I-1100.
Meanwhile, the “No” campaign is funded with more than $5 million from Big Beer like Budweiser and MillerCoors and the national beer distributors. These are powerful out-of-state groups that have shown they only care about profits. They have opposed a national drinking age of 21 and a lowering of the national blood-alcohol limit, and have demonstrated absolutely no interest in the public safety of Washington residents or the needs of consumers.
Scare tactics of the “No” campaign are just that. Any revenue lost to the state will be less than it costs to run state government for 12 hours, and any local impact will also be very small. In fact, estimates from the state Office of Financial Management neglected to account for additional sources of revenue, including the local B&O tax that will be paid by retailers under I-1100.
Initiative 1100 is designed first and foremost with consumers in mind. No longer will Washington residents have to deal with state-run liquor stores, with their inconvenient locations and hours. Washington consumers will be able to make one stop for all the groceries they need, just like the 32 other states in the country that have privatized liquor sales.
These states, from California and New York to Colorado and Kansas, on average are doing the same, and in some cases better, than the 18 states with state-run liquor stores in all the major alcohol statistics: alcohol consumption, underage drinking, binge drinking and DUI arrests. The numbers do not lie: Having state employees sell liquor does not make a state any safer, and allowing private retailers to sell liquor alongside beer and wine does not make a state any less safe.
Initiative 1100 makes sense — for our state government, for our state’s economy and for consumers.
John Bell is the owner of Willis Hall winery in Marysville and serves on the board of the Family Wineries of Washington State.
Our state Liquor Control Board has a conflict of interest in selling alcohol while at the same time being responsible for enforcing alcohol laws. The LCB now has 800 employees dedicated to sales and only about 80 employees dedicated to retail enforcement.
Instead, the liquor board is focused on sales and has jacked up the markup on liquor over the years to an outrageous 51.9 percent in addition to state taxes. This is essentially another tax — but a hidden tax, raised with little public attention — that has made our liquor the most expensive in the country and helped push honest consumers outside Washington for their liquor purchases, costing the state millions of dollars a year in tax revenue.
I-1100 throws out this 51.9 percent markup, takes the Liquor Control Board out of the sales business and allows it to focus on what it should have focused on all along: enforcement. The liquor board will be able to devote more time, staff and money to making sure liquor stays out of the hands of underage drinkers.
Thousands of small businesses like mine across the state support I-1100 because it will give a vital boost to our economy and end Prohibition-era restrictions that favor beer distributors and hurt consumers and the public good. Among our supporters are the Washington Restaurant Association, which represents 5,000 restaurants across the state; the Family Wineries of Washington State, which represents 100 small, family-owned wineries; and the Association of Washington Business, which includes 7,000 members representing 650,000 employees. Beyond these associations, many individual businesses — restaurants, grocery stores and wineries among them — support I-1100.
Meanwhile, the “No” campaign is funded with more than $5 million from Big Beer like Budweiser and MillerCoors and the national beer distributors. These are powerful out-of-state groups that have shown they only care about profits. They have opposed a national drinking age of 21 and a lowering of the national blood-alcohol limit, and have demonstrated absolutely no interest in the public safety of Washington residents or the needs of consumers.
Scare tactics of the “No” campaign are just that. Any revenue lost to the state will be less than it costs to run state government for 12 hours, and any local impact will also be very small. In fact, estimates from the state Office of Financial Management neglected to account for additional sources of revenue, including the local B&O tax that will be paid by retailers under I-1100.
Initiative 1100 is designed first and foremost with consumers in mind. No longer will Washington residents have to deal with state-run liquor stores, with their inconvenient locations and hours. Washington consumers will be able to make one stop for all the groceries they need, just like the 32 other states in the country that have privatized liquor sales.
These states, from California and New York to Colorado and Kansas, on average are doing the same, and in some cases better, than the 18 states with state-run liquor stores in all the major alcohol statistics: alcohol consumption, underage drinking, binge drinking and DUI arrests. The numbers do not lie: Having state employees sell liquor does not make a state any safer, and allowing private retailers to sell liquor alongside beer and wine does not make a state any less safe.
Initiative 1100 makes sense — for our state government, for our state’s economy and for consumers.
John Bell is the owner of Willis Hall winery in Marysville and serves on the board of the Family Wineries of Washington State.
Comments
(