Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsFriday, February 5, 2010
Olympia Push Grows Stronger to Privatize WA Liquor Sales
Posted by Cienna Madrid on Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 6:15 PM
Three bills that would relax the state's corpse-like grip on liquor control—and might help shore up the state's 2.6 billion budget shortfall—are advancing in the state legislature.
State Senator Tim Sheldon's (D-35) bill to privatize liquor sales in Washington (SB 6204) was voted out of the state senate's Committee on Labor, Commerce & Consumer Protection, however, it left with an amendment attached that would require the Washington State Liquor Control Board to "examine ways to increase efficiency and revenue." So instead of privatizing liquor sales—the clear and simple aim of the bill—the Washington State Liquor Control Board will conduct a study of its own effectiveness. Sen. Sheldon equated the amendment to "having the fox in the hen house."
Meanwhile, state Senator Rodney Tom (D-48) has introduced two bills (SB 6839 and SB 6840) that would privatize the sale of liquor. Says Senator Tom: "What I’m hearing from constituents is that in this budget crisis, they expect government to do things differently, and the most visceral way to show we’re serious about government reform is to get out of these activities we don’t need to be in—we don’t sell shoes or software, why would be in liquor retail business? There’s always the argument is it going to cost or make money... if I had to guess I’d say we’d have over 100 million a year in additional revenue. Even if we don't make anything, we’re not paying 1,200 employees worth of health care or pension benefits. In this difficult economic time, we’re trying to decide between cutting liquor store employees or teachers. I think the choice is obvious."
Both of Tom's bills have been referred to the Ways and Means Committee. Meanwhile, Sheldon's office stressed that this is a discussion that will continue throughout the session.
1
Privatizing liquor sales makes sense for so many reasons, a few of the major ones are referenced here. From a convenience standpoint alone, I wanna be able to go to QFC and get my Finlandia.
2
If we had Connecticut style liquor sales here I would be pleased and happy for the convenience. A packie in every neighborhood!
3
Even if we don't make anything, we’re not paying 1,200 employees worth of health care or pension benefits.
Yeah, you know who's going to be paying those health care or pension benefits if WA privatizes liquor sales? NO ONE! Those workers are going to get shafted (you think retail clerks in other industries [outside of CostCo] get those benefits?). So looking at it strictly from this perspective, Senator Tom is advocating pushing the state's budget crisis off on the people who can least afford it.
Dick.
Yeah, you know who's going to be paying those health care or pension benefits if WA privatizes liquor sales? NO ONE! Those workers are going to get shafted (you think retail clerks in other industries [outside of CostCo] get those benefits?). So looking at it strictly from this perspective, Senator Tom is advocating pushing the state's budget crisis off on the people who can least afford it.
Dick.
4
like any good fuck loolypop liquor drinker, GO STRANGER! WOOHOO! HUSKIES! WER$E HERE QUEER LIQUOR!!!!!!!!!!!!
anyways, yea *hiccup* gots to say Brendan Kiley Props!! toatlay taoltal totallly dude. thE taht hiccup* the wikipedia page has theeeee best ever line i read on the crazy batshit encyclopedia crap thank you brendan this quote is PRICELESS Mandela in the Mandala round and round round
"she endorsed the practice of necklacing (burning people alive using tyres and petrol)"
anyways, yea *hiccup* gots to say Brendan Kiley Props!! toatlay taoltal totallly dude. thE taht hiccup* the wikipedia page has theeeee best ever line i read on the crazy batshit encyclopedia crap thank you brendan this quote is PRICELESS Mandela in the Mandala round and round round
"she endorsed the practice of necklacing (burning people alive using tyres and petrol)"
5
I tend to agree with @3. Although I would love to buy liquor with more convenience, I would imagine most of the savings are from health care and pay costs, and the money going to the CEOs and upper management of the grocery stores. Also, the state doesn't have an interest in limiting my purchase of shoes and software, while limiting my purchases of alcohol is at least somewhat good social policy.
6
I don't care if I have to go to special stores: I just them to be able to compete on the variety. The state-approved list of rye whiskey is a joke.
7
@3, why not extend that argument to every employee? Convenience store workers don't get health insurance; should the state run all the convenience stores?
The simple fact is, selling commercial goods at retail is not the function of government. Yes, a thousand workers lose out; but 6 million state residents gain.
Some more than others; if you don't buy liquor, you just save a few tax dollars. But if you do, you benefit by gaining the ability to buy it at many more places, with all the variety and competition that entails.
Kill the liquor stores. Rodney Tom has my full support. Sheldon, no; we don't need to study anything. Liquor is a legal and legitimate commercial good.
The simple fact is, selling commercial goods at retail is not the function of government. Yes, a thousand workers lose out; but 6 million state residents gain.
Some more than others; if you don't buy liquor, you just save a few tax dollars. But if you do, you benefit by gaining the ability to buy it at many more places, with all the variety and competition that entails.
Kill the liquor stores. Rodney Tom has my full support. Sheldon, no; we don't need to study anything. Liquor is a legal and legitimate commercial good.
9
Don't just close the liquor stores - eliminate the WSLCB enforcement division. If a bar has issues, it's between them and the local jurisdiction.
11
The state has a booze monopoly. I don't see them walking away from the lucrative 57% mark up.
If you do the math just about every cocktail served in this state adds another dollar to the state's koffers. Like cigarettes they much more interested in the bottom line the side effects.
If you do the math just about every cocktail served in this state adds another dollar to the state's koffers. Like cigarettes they much more interested in the bottom line the side effects.
12
Ok, I'm down with getting the state out of liquor sales in theory, because it would be nice to buy Grey Goose from Costco, and buying booze on Sunday should be a given... but I fear that without state regulation, my neighborhood would be overrun with liquor stores on every corner. I don't want the whole Rainier Valley and Central Districts to turn into Compton Lite.
13
@12: that's a best racist and umm... at worst racist. There are many states without state run liquor stores where the "poor" and "nonwhites" manage to behave themselves. Christ.
14
@12: it would be awesome for you to get your top shelf liquor at a big box retailer, though! Yay suburban progress! I'm sorry to be a dick, but you're showing a really limited view of the larger world.
15
I agree privatize and fire all the overpaid union fakers who work in the stores.
" There are many states without state run liquor stores where the "poor" and "nonwhites" manage to behave themselves. "
Care to let us know where that is?
" There are many states without state run liquor stores where the "poor" and "nonwhites" manage to behave themselves. "
Care to let us know where that is?
16
Jigae, I say that because I live in Columbia City. I grew up in the Rainier Valley, and am not exactly rich myself. I have also lived in other states in (mostly white and Latino) liquor-soaked neighborhoods. Those neighborhoods sucked. I love my neighborhood now.
Liquor retailers know how to fuck up the neighborhood if you let them. At least with the existing system, the state has evenly dispersed existing liquor stores over the the communities.
My point wasn't OMG teh skary black peeplez!; it was more that it's gonna suck if I end up with 3 liquor stores within a 5-block radius of my home.
Liquor retailers know how to fuck up the neighborhood if you let them. At least with the existing system, the state has evenly dispersed existing liquor stores over the the communities.
My point wasn't OMG teh skary black peeplez!; it was more that it's gonna suck if I end up with 3 liquor stores within a 5-block radius of my home.
17
Also, Jigae, just to clarify, it's not the "poor" and "nonwhites" "behaving themselves" (as you put it) that I'm worried about. It's the retailers themselves.
18
I like our state-run liquor stores... but only because they remind me of shopping in East Germany before the Wall came down. Seriously. But treating me to a bit of ostalgia isn't a good enough reason for the state to be in the retail liquor business.
19
@11, no one is suggesting that they stop taxing the stuff. I don't mind paying tax. Pump it up a couple of dollars, I don't care.
@16, since the closing of the Wallingford store, there is a huge, densely populated swathe right in the middle of the state's biggest city that has no liquor store. The entire north of the ship canal from the U District all the way to Ballard, and north to 82nd in Crown Hill or 104th on Greenwood -- no liquor store. I live about in the center of that; I have to drive two and a half miles. That's just fucking stupid. If this was San Francisco or Chicago, there would be twenty liquor stores in that space, or more, and three or four of them would be superstores with hundreds of brands never before seen in this state.
@16, since the closing of the Wallingford store, there is a huge, densely populated swathe right in the middle of the state's biggest city that has no liquor store. The entire north of the ship canal from the U District all the way to Ballard, and north to 82nd in Crown Hill or 104th on Greenwood -- no liquor store. I live about in the center of that; I have to drive two and a half miles. That's just fucking stupid. If this was San Francisco or Chicago, there would be twenty liquor stores in that space, or more, and three or four of them would be superstores with hundreds of brands never before seen in this state.
21
"Also, the state doesn't have an interest in limiting my purchase of shoes and software, while limiting my purchases of alcohol is at least somewhat good social policy."
Oh, bullshit moralization. Limiting availability is not "responsible social policy".
Oh, bullshit moralization. Limiting availability is not "responsible social policy".
22
@19 Fnarf, that sucks rancid balls. Why the hell would they close that location? It was always so busy! That said, I'm sure there's a balance between having nothing available for 3 miles (forcing a drive in a decently populated semi-urban area) and having 20 liquor stores between your house and Will's. But running into Will at the liquor store would be pretty awkward.
23
Having moved here from a state with liquor convenience in my teens, I was shocked by how much less readily available the hard stuff was for my underage inebriation purposes.
Now, as a parent, and a drug legalization (and regulation) proponent, I really like the state run stores, both in terms of "child-proofing" booze and as one more reasonable option for future outlet of other recreational substances.
Now, as a parent, and a drug legalization (and regulation) proponent, I really like the state run stores, both in terms of "child-proofing" booze and as one more reasonable option for future outlet of other recreational substances.
24
@6, just the idea of a "state-approved list of rye whiskey" is really weird. Although guess I could see Kentucky having a list of approved bourbon whiskeys. That would sort of make sense.
25
Why do Downtown Libs go on and on and on about "The Environment" and health issues, but at the same time claim the right to freely ingest large amounts of toxic drugs like pot, alcohol and tobacco?
26
@16
"Liquor retailers know how to fuck up the neighborhood if you let them."
Good luck displacing Check Cashers.
"Liquor retailers know how to fuck up the neighborhood if you let them."
Good luck displacing Check Cashers.
27
@25
Why do Libertarian Okies advocate limited government, but at the same time believe ingesting toxic (and legal) substances be regulated at the State or Federal level?
Why do Libertarian Okies advocate limited government, but at the same time believe ingesting toxic (and legal) substances be regulated at the State or Federal level?
28
Fnarf, when I first moved here, I found the state-run liquor stores a little silly. Yet I've started to appreciate that there's no such thing as a run-down or sketchy liquor store in Seattle, and definitely no such thing as a liquor-store hold-up.
Moreover, every private liquor store I've ever seen trafficked in shelf after shelf of high-name-recognition brands (the stuff on the top shelf, especially, was limited to high-profile products from Diageo, Moët Hennessy, Pernod Ricard, Bacardi, and similarly massive conglomerates.) True selection is irrelevant and would waste shelf space; the only aim is to get the middle-brows drunk and score highest profit margin in the process.
The WA system creates an incentive to spread variety to as many stores as possible (as there are no other distribution avenues but bars and restaurants; if you distribute something at all, why not distribute it to your own stores?).
Small-batch gins and vodkas exist in every WA-run store, along with at least a small selection of akvavits, shochus, ouzos, and cachaças. And if I want something really specific, this little gem exists: http://liq.wa.gov/services/brandsearch.a…
Think of the neighborhood state liquor stores as the Sonic Boom of alcohol distribution: they might not have everything, but they'll have enough interesting options to suffice. The mega-stores, like 4th Ave S in SoDo (3 blocks from LINK!), to a lesser extent the 7th & Bell store, and perhaps a couple of others, have an Easy Street comprehensiveness. Most private liquor stores are run like Sam Goody (enjoy your Britney Spears / Bombay Sapphire "selection").
Moreover, every private liquor store I've ever seen trafficked in shelf after shelf of high-name-recognition brands (the stuff on the top shelf, especially, was limited to high-profile products from Diageo, Moët Hennessy, Pernod Ricard, Bacardi, and similarly massive conglomerates.) True selection is irrelevant and would waste shelf space; the only aim is to get the middle-brows drunk and score highest profit margin in the process.
The WA system creates an incentive to spread variety to as many stores as possible (as there are no other distribution avenues but bars and restaurants; if you distribute something at all, why not distribute it to your own stores?).
Small-batch gins and vodkas exist in every WA-run store, along with at least a small selection of akvavits, shochus, ouzos, and cachaças. And if I want something really specific, this little gem exists: http://liq.wa.gov/services/brandsearch.a…
Think of the neighborhood state liquor stores as the Sonic Boom of alcohol distribution: they might not have everything, but they'll have enough interesting options to suffice. The mega-stores, like 4th Ave S in SoDo (3 blocks from LINK!), to a lesser extent the 7th & Bell store, and perhaps a couple of others, have an Easy Street comprehensiveness. Most private liquor stores are run like Sam Goody (enjoy your Britney Spears / Bombay Sapphire "selection").
29
" There are many states without state run liquor stores where the "poor" and "nonwhites" manage to behave themselves. "
Still waiting to here where this mysterious place is.
Still waiting to here where this mysterious place is.
30
@28, if you've never been in another state's liquor superstore, I can see why you might think that. A place like Lee's Discount Liquors in Las Vegas has ten times as many rums, ten times as many tequilas, ten times (maybe twenty times) as many Scotch whiskeys, three or four times as many bourbons and ryes -- and on and on and on. To say nothing of the incredible range of bizarre aperitifs and digestifs. Some of the WA stores have a good variety but nothing remotely like a great one. The official WA state master list comprises maybe a fourth or less of the booze available in the world, and the obscure items are only available to you if you want to buy a CASE.
Wine is a different story, because of course the city is full of outstanding wine shops that carry just about anything you could dream of, but the WSLCB carries wine too. They have a special consulting board to determine what to carry. I have no doubt they all get paid a hundred grand each to do so. And yet their selection in the stores is LAUGHABLE.
WSLCB does a shitty job. Some of their store managers are outstanding. They will have no trouble getting good jobs in high-end private stores.
Wine is a different story, because of course the city is full of outstanding wine shops that carry just about anything you could dream of, but the WSLCB carries wine too. They have a special consulting board to determine what to carry. I have no doubt they all get paid a hundred grand each to do so. And yet their selection in the stores is LAUGHABLE.
WSLCB does a shitty job. Some of their store managers are outstanding. They will have no trouble getting good jobs in high-end private stores.
31
The one main reason this is getting considered this year:
There will be no secure, regulated place to sell marijuana when/if its legalized.
There will be no secure, regulated place to sell marijuana when/if its legalized.
32
Shafting more workers out of benefits will save some money (no where close to 100 million in savings, total exaggeration), much of it canceled out when they join the ranks of uninsured.
The out-of-state grocery and liquor chains are always lobbying to privatize sales. The taxing benefits always outweigh their arguments.
There won't be any increase in consumption in Rainier Valley or the Hill Top or Puyallup or Toppenish, just robberies of liquor stores added to the list of crimes police have to deal with.
The out-of-state grocery and liquor chains are always lobbying to privatize sales. The taxing benefits always outweigh their arguments.
There won't be any increase in consumption in Rainier Valley or the Hill Top or Puyallup or Toppenish, just robberies of liquor stores added to the list of crimes police have to deal with.
33
I heard all of the arguments about the evils of privatization of the liquor stores back in Iowa in the 80's. Do-gooders (who are mostly dippy conservatives in Iowa) wrung their hands about the neighborhoods, they clutched their pearls about the workers, and they shed a tasteful tear or two about - wait for it - "The Children"
But they went ahead and did it anyway, and it works. Society didn't collapse, we didn't get liquor stores on every block, the children are fine.
If we are concerned about tacky liquor stores flooding the valley, zoning can take care of that. Or, just make it a requirement that a store also has to sell fresh meat and produce.
But relax - it's not the end of the world. And once the dust settles, you'll see significant savings. Just tax the hell out of it, and let somebody else sell it.
But they went ahead and did it anyway, and it works. Society didn't collapse, we didn't get liquor stores on every block, the children are fine.
If we are concerned about tacky liquor stores flooding the valley, zoning can take care of that. Or, just make it a requirement that a store also has to sell fresh meat and produce.
But relax - it's not the end of the world. And once the dust settles, you'll see significant savings. Just tax the hell out of it, and let somebody else sell it.
34
@30, I completely agree that the state they shouldn't spend resources on wine distribution, when they're so bad at it.
(On the other hand, just yesterday I tracked down a particular WA desert wine at a state liquor store, and was reminded how some grocery chains use their wine licences to commit highway robbery -- it was $3 less than QFC's "card" price and $10 less than QFC's regular price. I'm not sure what implications that would have for hard-liquor deregulation; I'm just on a mission lately to remind Seattle that its ubiquitous Quality Food Chain is massively overpriced. Safeway crap at Whole Foods Prices. Plus token "natural" sections at 4 times PCC's prices for those who've apparently never set foot in a PCC.)
(On the other hand, just yesterday I tracked down a particular WA desert wine at a state liquor store, and was reminded how some grocery chains use their wine licences to commit highway robbery -- it was $3 less than QFC's "card" price and $10 less than QFC's regular price. I'm not sure what implications that would have for hard-liquor deregulation; I'm just on a mission lately to remind Seattle that its ubiquitous Quality Food Chain is massively overpriced. Safeway crap at Whole Foods Prices. Plus token "natural" sections at 4 times PCC's prices for those who've apparently never set foot in a PCC.)
35
@30, you're also correct that I've never been in such a private liquor "superstore." One of the drawbacks of growing up in a large Northeastern college town is that most of the recent college grads think industrial-use ethanol with artificial flavorings added (SKYY vodka) amounts to a premium spirit.
On the other hand, if one wants to do anything BESIDES get plastered, Boston beats Las Vegas by light years.
On the other hand, if one wants to do anything BESIDES get plastered, Boston beats Las Vegas by light years.
36
1. Privatize. Actually, de-governmentmonopolize.
2. Allow go cups at bars.
3. Keep bars open all night long.
This place is so fucking uptight the scandies should really learn to live a little bit. Drinking on the streets would encourage friendship and frivolity; right now the uptightness about a bit of booze only reinforces the bleak and desperate personalities we see all over. "We're inured to what we have, so let's keep it" is about the best summation of the progovernmentmonopoly side of this with all its "fauxprogressive" pretense. They should allow grey goose to be sold at fucking starbucks. Loosen up and live a little.
2. Allow go cups at bars.
3. Keep bars open all night long.
This place is so fucking uptight the scandies should really learn to live a little bit. Drinking on the streets would encourage friendship and frivolity; right now the uptightness about a bit of booze only reinforces the bleak and desperate personalities we see all over. "We're inured to what we have, so let's keep it" is about the best summation of the progovernmentmonopoly side of this with all its "fauxprogressive" pretense. They should allow grey goose to be sold at fucking starbucks. Loosen up and live a little.
37
@28:
@16: I don't want to fight with you, but I don't really understand what you're scared of the retailers doing? Do you think they'll open too many stores near your home? As much as I hate invoking capitalism here, don't you think there's a limit to the number the market can bear?
Yet I've started to appreciate that there's no such thing as a run-down or sketchy liquor store in Seattle.I have actually never seen a liquor store here that wasn't both: The flickering fluorescents, the feel of doom and gloom, the lack of selection. It's pretty pathetic compared to other states with more liberal liquor laws.
@16: I don't want to fight with you, but I don't really understand what you're scared of the retailers doing? Do you think they'll open too many stores near your home? As much as I hate invoking capitalism here, don't you think there's a limit to the number the market can bear?
38
@37: I think you may have confused the words "run-down" and "sterile."
You may also have confused the image of "a less-than-scintillating place to purchase alcohol" with "abandon all hope ye who come to drown your sorrows here" or "so sketchy you're sure the next guy to walk through the door is going to stick up the place."
You may also have confused the image of "a less-than-scintillating place to purchase alcohol" with "abandon all hope ye who come to drown your sorrows here" or "so sketchy you're sure the next guy to walk through the door is going to stick up the place."
39
@38: I'm from the East Coast and Ii've been in my share of liquor stores with bullet proof glass where you point at what you want and then pass money under a divider. While not that level of sketchy or terrifying, the Washington state liquor stores are still pretty crappy and gross.
Maybe they're sterile in your neighborhood, but the old Wallingford and current Capital Hill locations wouldn't win any prizes for cleanliness.
Maybe they're sterile in your neighborhood, but the old Wallingford and current Capital Hill locations wouldn't win any prizes for cleanliness.
40
" There are many states without state run liquor stores where the "poor" and "nonwhites" manage to behave themselves. "
Still waiting to here where this mysterious place is?
Still waiting to here where this mysterious place is?
42
I recently moved from Seattle to a town with private liquor stores, which I find worse.I don't like tons of dodgy stores that feel like vultures to me. I'd rather the state be the vulture, keeping the presence of hard liquor "contained" and subtle, and bringing some benefit of good jobs and taxes. I don't demand that my liquor shopping be aesthetically scintillating, and actually I think liquor is BAD so it shouldn't be that way. The current structure performs a desirable role of subtly discouraging the purchase of hard liquor. Sorry I'm no FUN but I'm also no puritan and would love to see dutch style coffeeshops, much healthier, safer and spiritually sound and with less associated health care costs and public safety problems.
43
"The drug I like should be easier to get, and others' little vices should be discouraged by an ugly, inconvenient state monopoly." Thanks, particle_girl!
44
I fail to see how increasing the number of vendors in this space is going to benefit anyone but the liquor sellers in the long run. Like it or not, this stuff is poison that ruins lives. It may be enjoyable and deeply woven into the fabric of our culture, but that could've been said of slavery in another age from some points of view.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Pill The Homos! by Dan Savage
-
Dear Huffington Post... by Dan Savage
-
Because Guns Make Us More Safer by Goldy
-
The Rick Santorum Rally in Tacoma Probably Could Have Gone Better by Paul Constant
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
Because Guns Make Us Safer by Goldy
-
Gay Kids Are Still Killing Themselves by Dan Savage
-
Gregoire: "This is signed!" by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (44) RSS