The bitter taste of spending cuts gets real for legislators this week, as the House puts forth its version of a budget that would cut billions from education, health care and social services. At such a sober moment, a renewed (and improved) effort to get the state out of the business of selling liqu

or, and generate new state revenue, deserves a serious look.

Costco is reportedly ready to push a bill that would do much of what last fall’s Initiative 1000 would have done — remove the state’s monopoly on the sale and distribution of hard liquor, putting it in the hands of private retailers and wholesalers.

It would address two key reservations voters had about I-1000, which they rejected by a 53-47 percent margin: It would raise substantial new state and local revenue — perhaps hundreds of millions of dollars — in the form of significant license fees (around 7 percent of gross receipts for the first five years) and business taxes. It would also prohibit most small retailers from selling booze by limiting licenses to operations with at least 9,000 square feet. Exceptions could be made for rural areas that have no stores that large, but you wouldn’t see Captain Morgan displays at your local mini-mart.

The key reason for getting the state out of the liquor business remains valid: It’s not an essential public service, and certainly not something that should occupy government’s time or expense, beyond enforcement and revenue collection.

Recent efforts by the state Liquor Control Board to expand availability and convenience, while welcome, actually help illustrate the point.

Liquor officials want to try co-locating a few liquor stores inside existing grocery stores, start a gift-card program, and open two 10,000-square-foot specialty stores in urban areas. They’d also like to expand and standardize the operating hours of state-run and state-contracted liquor stores. All, clearly, are efforts to increase sales, and thus state revenue.

Sorry, but marketing consumer goods, liquor or otherwise, isn’t a strength of government. Nor is it its job. Private-sector competition is what will bring consumers the choices and shopping experience they really want. This proposal would do it responsibly.

Some Olympia insiders say Costco’s bill, which has yet to be formally introduced, comes too late in the session to have a realistic chance this year. Predicted opposition by unions representing liquor store employees could slow it down.

But with the reality of painful budget cuts about to set in, lawmakers can’t afford to dismiss a new source of revenue that’s workable and sensible.