I-1183 Liquor Initiative

[Boss .300 winmag]

The laws are there, its the legal system and liberal judges who are to blame.

[JimmyHoffa]

I agree with a few of the others--government shouldn't be in business.  I too think the laws are a bit lax, but that is what they should be working on in the legislature.  As far as I know the only businesses that sell liquor that aren't state are on the military bases and some of the indian stores--I don't know the square footage of the buildings, but they were comparable to state ones or larger.

[bigtex]

As far as I know the only businesses that sell liquor that aren't state are on the military bases and some of the indian stores--I don't know the square footage of the buildings, but they were comparable to state ones or larger.

Here's some info about the liquor biz in WA. You can get them at 4 different places:
- Military Base
- Indian Rez
- WA St Run Store
- WA St Contract store

In the state ran stores it is essentially government ran. The employees are state employees. These are the larger liquor stores that are their own building/space.

In WA contract stores people will actually bid to obtain the "license" to run the store. The employees are not state employees. Part of the revenue does go to the manager/owner of the store. These are smaller stores in more rural areas and can either be their own building or in other stores, I have seen these in hardware and drug stores.

Current law has a cap on how many contract and state stores can be in existence at one time, the number was increased a couple years ago.

[pianoman9701]

The state can't run the state effectively. Why we think they're any better at selling booze escapes me. Privatize. As far as the penalties are concerned, they should go with mandatory fines and imprisonment for a second offense or a related manslaughter by car. Why people get a $250 fine for selling to minors, I don't know. But, the courts could easily fix that by handing out maximum fines and the incidence of retailers selling to minors would disappear almost instantly.

[WAcoyotehunter]

Lots of states do just fine with private booze sales.  I say YES.

[yakimarcher]

I would be for it but the state is giong to use that money to put more a**hole cops out pulling over everyone who drives between 11pm and 5 am. not all cops are *censored*s but all the ones doing traffic patrol at night are A**HOLES!

[canyelk48]

Its my understanding that a majority of the profits from the state run liquor stores goes towards our public schools and if the initiative passes then it would mean less money towards education just so that it is more convenient to buy booze.  If that is true then I know how I am voting.

Yeah, and that's the same "fairy tale" that the public was told about the profits from the State Lottery sales; we all know that didn't happen, otherwise we wouldn't be having local school's initiatives shoved down our throats every few years with threats of no more sports and extracurricular activities if the initiative fails!

[pianoman9701]

I would be for it but the state is giong to use that money to put more a**hole cops out pulling over everyone who drives between 11pm and 5 am. not all cops are *censored*s but all the ones doing traffic patrol at night are A**HOLES!

Sounds like someone with a couple of tickets! 

[Elkaholic daWg]

 Or one who had to deal with a LIAR in court,which I have seen before. To judges Badges only attach to perfection

[MikeWalking]

I'm still on the fence, but leaning towards Yes.  I resent the overblown scare tactics and distortions on the No side.  I know the nice people at my favorite Liquor store, Skykomish Liquor & Deli were against the last ones. They said it would have ended it for them, I'd hate to see them go down over this one.    Before the State passes out money to Schools etc there's another issue to consider.  Overhead, Rent, Utilities...   I've yet to see a State  Liquor Store that wasn't on Private property in Leased space paying rent, payroll, transport etc (outside of Rez and Contract stores)

If it's privatized the State should get more per sale as other States have, at least I've heard it explained that way. 

[lokidog]

I'm not sure yet but I wonder if it will do anything but make it easier to purchase... which I don't intrinsically have a problem with.

As I see it, the state makes a profit from the sale of liquor and they get the taxes that are added on to the  cost and profit.  All of this is paid by the consumer.  The taxes go for a variety of things including education, the profit goes to pay employees and pay for rent of space, the rent money then goes to landlords who often have employees or other companies that collect some of the money from the original profit of the sale.

Now, if the sale is from a private store, what will/could happen?  The price to the consumer will decrease... yeah, don't think so!  The taxes assessed will decrease?  Don't think so again!  OK, so the taxes are the same funding education and other less important liberal junk.  The profit now goes to a corporation since most of the smaller, privately/locally owned stores will not be allowed to sell.  Does that profit trickle down into local communities as increased numbers of workers, or rent payed to landlords and the downward flow of monies from that?  Probably not, more money to line CEO's pockets since the existing employees will just ring up the purchases and the rent or mortgages from these buildings would be there anyways.  Did I miss anything?  Who is funding the "yes" campaign?  That may answer the question for some.

So, in the end, I am not sure I see any advantage in getting rid of the state liquor stores other than availability and that governemnt should probably not be in the business in the first place.  What to do?     

[uplandhunter870]

i like privatized liquor, its that way here in montana. i can tell you that liquor here isnt much if at all cheaper here compared to the WA ST. run stores. from what ive seen the horror stories of the opponents of how donny drunko can leave the bar and swing by the local liquor store at 2am or how little johny would be a able to get liquor at the mini mart are completely scare tactic BS. the mini marts here dont sell liquor only beer and dont between 2-6am (just like in WA). the liquor stores here hold similar hours the those ran by WA ST.

what i like most about private liquor is the competition between stores, some are nicer than others and the variety of liquor is amazing its not like the WA stores that all carry the same limited product list. the liquor store i go to here in bozeman is a third of the size of most WA St. stores but has ten times the selection and theres always something new on the selves

[Glockster]

Will be voting YES.

Just got back from a Napa Valley trip with my wife.  A 1/5 of Maker's Mark is $19.99 down there and you can buy it in any grocery store any day of the week. I got carded every single time, everywhere we went (I look nothing like a 20 something....I'm UGLY gray hair and balding).

Here in WA that same brand/same bottle costs $29.95, I can only buy it in state stores, can't buy it on Sundays. 

I do agree that we need minimum fines/jail time for those caught selling to minors and increased penalties for drunk drivers who cause injury. 

[GoldTip]

I will vote YES for privatizing liquor sales.  The scare tactics are total crap in my opinion and anyone who thinks that little Susie is going to be able to get Booze any easier after the privatization of liquor sales is kidding themselves.  Kids get Booze now, they drink Booze now and they go to Booze parties now, and the state run liquor stores are not preventing this or slowing it down in any way.  The state is not managing their money well and now is managing it even worse by endorsing and I am quite sure supporting the scare tactic adds that are out there. 

[Curly]

I liked last year's Initiatives better, but hopefully this one can make it with the changes that have been made.  I don't think a 10,000 SF building will be any better at not selling to minors than a 5,000 SF store........