Print
Email
Share

Washington voters kick state out of liquor business

by Associated Press

KING5.com

Posted on November 8, 2011 at 9:30 PM

Updated Wednesday, Nov 9 at 9:06 AM

OLYMPIA, Wash. -- Washington voters on Tuesday approved a plan to privatize liquor sales and dismantle controls that have been in place since Prohibition, siding with retailing giant Costco in the costliest initiative campaign in state history.

Unofficial results early Wednesday morning showed the measure with 60 percent support in early returns. Costco Wholesale Corp. had committed $22 million to supporting the measure -- $6 for every registered voter -- as executives portrayed the Issaquah-based company as a crusader for consumers and said that it could take years to make up the investment in the initiative.

Wholesalers provided much of the opposition funding, as retailers will now be able to bypass them and buy product directly from producers. The new rules go into effect in June, and about 1,000 people who currently operate the state's system will lose their jobs.

Costco had backed another privatization measure that failed last year with 47 percent of the vote. Acknowledging that the 2010 proposal wasn't ideal, supporters returned this year with a plan that includes more revenue for state and local governments, as well as stricter controls on which stores can sell liquor.

The measure will end Washington's state-run liquor system, which was formed in the 1930s in the aftermath of Prohibition, and allow stores larger than 10,000 square feet to sell liquor. Opponents pointed to an exemption in the law that could allow smaller stores to sell liquor if there are no other outlets in a trade area.

Leading Democrats, including Gov. Chris Gregoire, opposed the measure because of concerns about the consequences of expanding access to liquor.

It's not clear whether the measure will lead to lower liquor prices. That will depend on how much distributors and retailers mark up their prices, according to a state analysis.

If distributors and retailers combine to mark up liquor by about 25 percent, that would put prices on par with current ones. The state projects that markups could be as high as 45 percent while initiative supporters believe that is unrealistic because of the competition the measure will create.

The new rules allowing retailers to buy directly from distilleries could also push prices down.

Initiative 1183 did have a broad coalition of support, drawing praise from restaurants, retailers, groceries and family wineries. Despite this, Costco was the primary funding source, with the next largest donors -- Safeway and Trader Joe's -- giving just $50,000.

The spending was the largest ever from one donor in Washington, but it wasn't unprecedented in U.S. initiative campaigns: Last year, Pacific Gas & Electric spent $46 million in its failed bid to curb the expansion of public power cooperatives in California.

Print
Email
Share
 

To add a comment, please register or login.

1000 characters remaining

Submit

We welcome your comments on this story's topic. Off-topic comments, personal attacks, and inappropriate language may be flagged and removed, and comment privileges blocked, per our Terms of Service. Thanks for keeping the comments space respectful.

Privacy Policy

You have indicated this comment should be removed.

Close

The comment has been submitted for review. Thank you .

Comments: Displaying 1 - 15 of 110

rivercityman said on December 5, 2011 at 4:06 AM

Reading some of the Earlier posted comments on here is enlightening. Spoken in their own charming, Illiterate way.. There's really no downside to the Passing of 1183. It definitely benefits businesses and consumers in Washington State. ... It removes a useless; sluggish; redundant-layer of state government that simply benefits the state worker unions and rolls.. The state-administration over Liquor is Costly; redundant; inefficient; riddled with Favoritism and political-Friends who needed Great Paying jobs with Little Work involved. For little son Johnny; or Uncle Frank, who couldn't get a job anywhere else.. The voters undoubtedly did the right thing in passing 1183. 'Now the Efficiencies and savings will help and benefit all Washingtonians and nearby areas of Oregon and British Columbia' .. As for the ridiculous claims that it will result in increased-crime and highway-accidents.. 'Not-so'.. Fortunately, those claims Cannot be backed up by any presented evidence or facts...

77912464
Flag this comment

rivercityman said on December 5, 2011 at 3:35 AM

Without a doubt, the passing of I-1183 is a clear; Substantial, victory for all consumers and businesses in Washington State... It sets a clear; definitive precedent. Also it will credibly Benefit consumers in nearby areas of Oregon State, and British Columbia.. ..... The State of Washington had absolutely no business being involved in Liquor sales. 'The insignificant blip in ending a few state jobs; will be amply-replaced and rewarded in the local economy.. By having to add Hundreds of more worthwhile, private sector jobs due to the increased business.. 'I congratulate Washington voters on taking the right decision and overwhelmingly passing I-1183'..

77912107
Flag this comment

btvsrcks said on November 28, 2011 at 9:39 AM

"Will put 900 people out of work. People who were earning and spending money in our communities, and paying taxes. Now they will be collecting unemployment. Couple this with the added cost of increased alcohol related health problems, incarcerations resulting from more domestic violence and DUI cases, and I ask, where are the savings now ?" First of all, half of the liquor stores are grandfathered in because they are privately owned. Second of all, 900 people out of work STATE WIDE is not really a huge amount. They will more than likely head to said stores greater than 10000 sq ft since business there will most likely pick up. And so far nobody has been able to show me a study that eliminating liquor stores will cause more people to become alcoholics or that more kids have access to alcohol. And even if the latter does, you can't control what is in parents homes. Therefore no study is going to be accurate because that can't be taken into account.

77568256
Flag this comment

treeclimber said on November 24, 2011 at 1:39 AM

cosco will reep the rewards and the money they make off booze will go to the stock holders witch are mostly located in new york..the tax on booze will double to make up for the lost state money.

77417207
Flag this comment

vanceox said on November 13, 2011 at 8:57 AM

One less agency for Comrade Gregoirski & her poulet bureau to control!!! Let's get rid of more bureaucratic agencies & keep more of what we earn!!

76853219
Flag this comment

otter814u said on November 10, 2011 at 2:54 PM

I'd like to see the scientific study that shows teens will be able to get alcohol easier at these places as opposed to the liquor store.

76745957
Flag this comment

poppasito6188411 said on November 10, 2011 at 12:28 PM

@wearedoomed: you must have found some off the wall article that supports your ideas as a quick google search of "DUI deaths by State" shows several reference articles, none of which support what you are saying. Took your advice and did look up. SORRY!

76737041
Flag this comment

AJ_Arrows2f4 said on November 10, 2011 at 11:28 AM

"Washington voters kick state out of liquor business " Good. Now kick 'em out of our lives in other ways as well.

76733027
Flag this comment

wearedoomed said on November 10, 2011 at 11:26 AM

Washington is 5th in the nation in DUI deaths, can't get any worse! I posted my source earlier but King5 wouldn't allow it. Look it up!

76732903
Flag this comment

thecrankster said on November 10, 2011 at 10:13 AM

andyblue555-" Freeedomfrfank you are trolling and add nothing to the comments section." What are you talking about? freedomfranks comments are spot on.

76727703
Flag this comment

andyblue555 said on November 10, 2011 at 10:04 AM

andyblue555 avatar

Freeedomfrfank you are trolling and add nothing to the comments section.

76727084
Flag this comment

Mytake said on November 10, 2011 at 9:44 AM

Jack, theres the problem. There ARE no "untouchable programs and obligations." Instead of teaching the children that its a well funded government is whats society needs, teach them its the inovative, smart working, motivated individual that makes for a great society. When people get a free gubmint check, all working and motivation stops.

76725767
Flag this comment

maltbymike said on November 10, 2011 at 8:40 AM

When can I start buying as Costco??

76721863
Flag this comment

roblh31 said on November 10, 2011 at 7:00 AM

Next year we will get rid of liquor taxes in its current form and lower it to 99 cents per liter. Initiatives Rcok! And Liquor for ALL!

76715964
Flag this comment

w7rkd said on November 10, 2011 at 6:32 AM

Must be alot of bankrupt alcoholics in our state!

76714614
Flag this comment

freedomfrank said on November 10, 2011 at 6:13 AM

Duffer,,, is everything OK,, do you need a hug? Show me some statistics to back up your claims about the increased DV, DUI and other stuff? Are the other states with liquor stores having more problems than us? We will put 900 people who never should have had a job doing what they were doing in the first place. I drink and will not drink more or less just because I can but it at Albertsons vs the Gestapo run store. This is AMERICA bud,,, home of the free and land of the brave. We don't need the effing government telling us when and where we can buy a bottle of Jack Daniels!!!

76713667
Flag this comment

jackwong said on November 10, 2011 at 6:10 AM

For the ones who are glad that it passed: So now instead of the drinkers are paying for the revenues needed for this cash-strapped state, we will find a way for all of us to pay for the essential untouchable programs and obligations. We need to keep investing in our people, It's not wise to turn our back on the needy and the next generation of children who will run the world.

76713599
Flag this comment

duffer5256 said on November 10, 2011 at 12:23 AM

Will put 900 people out of work. People who were earning and spending money in our communities, and paying taxes. Now they will be collecting unemployment. Couple this with the added cost of increased alcohol related health problems, incarcerations resulting from more domestic violence and DUI cases, and I ask, where are the savings now ?

76707127
Flag this comment

Mytake said on November 9, 2011 at 11:27 PM

Im SO glad this passed if for no other reason, that it totally pi**es Jackwong!

76706143
Flag this comment

BraveNewWhirled said on November 9, 2011 at 11:03 PM

Yep, sure gonna be a few WA State emps looking for a teaching job so they can take 3 months off in the summer. These days, government employees produce nothing but debt for the average taxpayer coerced into paying pensions and healthcare benefits for bureaucratic slobs. Show me a government employee and I will show you three private-sector workers supporting them.

76705717
Flag this comment

masterblaster said on November 9, 2011 at 8:29 PM

The big businesses have used the force of law to ensure that small businesses can't sell liquor. That's the only reason this initiative was wrong. If you want to buy a bottle of scotch you'll have to wend your way through the TVs, clothes, etc.

76700971
Flag this comment

andyblue555 said on November 9, 2011 at 8:11 PM

andyblue555 avatar

The initiative states that if grocery stores opt into a new voluntary “self-policing” program, then they are exempt from having to pay the doubled fines.this measure creates a brand new 27 percent tax on retailers and distributors—costs that will be passed on to consumers. if there is not a 10,000-square foot grocery store in a neighborhood or “trade area,” then any store regardless of size, including mini-marts and gas stations, cannot be denied a liquor license by the Liquor Control Board. the number of liquor stores in Washington will skyrocket to at least 4-times the current number—almost immediately. That’s irresponsible and dangerous. estimate a broad range of markups in the private sector—on the low end, we will see a 47% retail markup, and on the high end, 72% Enjoy!

76700246
Flag this comment

eastsiderocks said on November 9, 2011 at 8:03 PM

@conseula it's on-line and also in the voter's pamphlet. Here is a copy for you since it might be a little difficult for you too find. To obtain a retail spirits license, a store must have at least 10,000 square feet of enclosed retail space in a single structure. However, Initiative 1183 also allows a retail spirits license for a store at the location of a former state liquor store or contract liquor store, even if the store is smaller than 10,000 square feet. It also allows smaller stores where there are no 10,000 square foot licensed spirits stores in the area. Initiative 1183 requires retail stores to participate in training their employees to prevent sales of alcohol to minors and inebriated persons.

76699947
Flag this comment

conseula said on November 9, 2011 at 7:16 PM

@freemonttroll..Where did you get your facts that a retail store must have ten thousand square feet in order to sell liquor? Heresay? Horses Mouth? or Fact..if Fact, tell me where to find it.. I remember in living in New Port Hills in the 70's and there was a Strip Mall with a beauty shop, hardware store, maybe a small grocery store and a private owned "mom and pop" liquor store..I would say twelve to fourteen hundred square feet..Other than liquor and wine they sold candy, pop, trinkets..And you could take the kids in with you and they had such fun. Then the State came in and mom and pop gone..Private owned liquor stores our competitive..they can set their own profit margin..

76697982
Flag this comment

Sir_Real said on November 9, 2011 at 5:44 PM

Denkoko is proof that the out of state liquor unions and their greed were attempting to buy our vote. He and about 5 other stooges liquor and wine union I've counted on here.

76694097
Flag this comment

koolaiddrinker said on November 9, 2011 at 5:01 PM

We finally got over prohibition and joined the 42 other states that don't have government stores!

76692239
Flag this comment

dakotanative said on November 9, 2011 at 4:59 PM

jazzysport said "And enforcing sales at 4 times as many stores will require a huge increase in state regulation to regulate all these stores. Hire some of the laid off workers to work for the new and much bigger department that will enforce the laws . It will be a nightmare trying to keep 1200 stores in compliance vs 400 stores. The money just goes to a bigger department to enforce and regulate all the new stores." How many extra places will really be selling alcohol? Zero! Many stores that ALREADY sell alcohol will add hard liquor. Many state stores will swap over to a private company, and a few will just close, for a net LOSS. A handful of ACE Hardware type stores that do not currently sell beer may pick up liquor, but overall, the enforcement will not be a noticeable increase if not a loss.

76692136
Flag this comment

coyotebmw said on November 9, 2011 at 4:20 PM

It is amazing how many people on this forum are ready to criticize the initiative with in accurate data, or with out ever really sitting down and reading the initiative! Many of the comments sound like they came from the NO on 1183 campaign literature, without any attempt to verify the information.

76690472
Flag this comment

shoreline said on November 9, 2011 at 3:58 PM

Denkoko, A "No" vote on this initiative would have shown that the out of state liquor distributers and Unions "bought" this election. Which is worse? It's also funny hearing you slamming OUR initiative to privatize liquor sales while sitting at your computer in Scapoose, Or. where you already have privatized (and cheaper) liquor. Thanks for your "out of state" opinion though! Isn't there something going on in Oregon you should be opining about?

76689454
Flag this comment

pixelater said on November 9, 2011 at 3:44 PM

@ jackwong, jack you've been around a long time, there really is no need for you to continue and try to convince us that you are a fool, you have succeeded on many previous occasions.

76688676
Flag this comment

pixelater said on November 9, 2011 at 3:41 PM

@ denkoko, I too am glad you don't live here. We don't need any more left wingnut liberals, we have more than our share.

76688539
Flag this comment

jazzysport said on November 9, 2011 at 2:49 PM

The state has a 30 billion dollar budget. 50 to 60 million starting in 2013 extra to the state at best is nothing but "chump change". privatizing liquor sales has no affect on the budget whatsoever. Extra money for Police and Firefighters not really. Also, the price will not be lower. The license is 27 percent so a mark up of 25 percent makes it more expensive. Also, how late can they sell booze. Till 2am ? The notion that this will lower prices and generate more money for the state is over stated. After 2013 the amount goes down to 35 million. nothing but chump change to the state. And enforcing sales at 4 times as many stores will require a huge increase in state regulation to regulate all these stores. Hire some of the laid off workers to work for the new and much bigger department that will enforce the laws . It will be a nightmare trying to keep 1200 stores in compliance vs 400 stores. The money just goes to a bigger department to enforce and regulate all the new stores.

76685916
Flag this comment

yessir said on November 9, 2011 at 2:41 PM

and Chuck... Costco is unionized... it's Sam's Club that's not.

76685487
Flag this comment

yessir said on November 9, 2011 at 2:40 PM

Hopefully Costco and the major stores picking up the liquor sales will hire some of these laid off workers. I'll be curious to see the next initative of convenience stores trying to sell liquor. What's that... maybe 3 years away? I'm certain Costco won't be bankrolling that one ;)

76685421
Flag this comment

stonetrails said on November 9, 2011 at 2:04 PM

stonetrails avatar

dartqueen - "Did you know that the government had the final decision as to whether or not I could buy Jack Daniels? All gone now......the control.....all gone" - - - - - I'm not so sure that is accurate. I'm reasonable certain the state still has the control, as do counties, to decide what liquor is sold in their respective governed areas as well as what percentage of alcohol a liquor can have that is sold in their state and respective counties. I doubt that control went to corporate America. And if it did, well get ready for 1 million proof Vodka and Kegs as big as Baltimore!

76683524
Flag this comment

chuckweezer said on November 9, 2011 at 1:42 PM

this think how many $'s would have been spent if Costco was Unionized ?

76682129
Flag this comment

dartqueen said on November 9, 2011 at 1:24 PM

The main reason that I am pleased that this initiative passed is that the State of Washington has been controlling and monopolizing the liquor business way too long. Our country was formed with the idea of freedom......I am glad that I have the freedom to buy my liquor without having to go to a government controlled store where the government decides which liquor I should be able to purchase. Did you know that the government had the final decision as to whether or not I could buy Jack Daniels? All gone now......the control.....all gone. By the way, you people out there that say that Costco is monopolizing the market, just remember that the government is the one that monopolized you all these years.

76680864
Flag this comment

spacedover said on November 9, 2011 at 12:53 PM

This state of far out leftists are finally beginning to figure out issues instead of lining the pockets of state government with future revenues, they go for competitive prices on liquor. This will surly help them to figure out why they have no funds after the state has imposed more taxes on them. I see at last what all the conservations have been trying to say. Good Business means a better deal for the consumers.

76679087
Flag this comment

blackforge said on November 9, 2011 at 12:46 PM

While job are lost more will open up from this. Though those who lost thier job may not find work doing the same thing. This new work will be people paying taxes and not drawing from our taxes we pay.

76678696
Flag this comment

jackwong said on November 9, 2011 at 12:41 PM

This is Fascism at it's worst. Costco controlling our policies. Many living-wage state-created jobs are now lost because of this. Replaced by the 1%'s greed. It's just sad.

76678424
Flag this comment

cruzer7gurl said on November 9, 2011 at 12:18 PM

Thank you, Costco. Shoppers in Washington have been held hostage by the state liquor store system too long.

76677007
Flag this comment

banditrider said on November 9, 2011 at 12:02 PM

Lots more jobs lost at statel level because of this. How about if Costco hires the displaced workers.

76675969
Flag this comment

denkoko said on November 9, 2011 at 11:53 AM

I am VERY HAPPY, that I am NOT a washington resident. The people of washington have just showed the $$$repudlican$$$walstreet$$$MONEY$$$PIRATES$$$, That if they spend enough $$$MONEY$$$, they can ALSO BUY the AVERAGE AMERICAN !!!! At least in washington !!!!

76675361
Flag this comment

noskills said on November 9, 2011 at 11:30 AM

@andyblue555 If you did your research you would find that the statistics just dont back up anything that you are saying. Underage drinking in our state is right on par with virtually every other state whether they have state run liquor stores or private liquor stores. Its actually really easy to look up the statistics.

76673769
Flag this comment

Mytake said on November 9, 2011 at 11:25 AM

Its not just costco freedomtroll,, its safeway, fred meyer, walmart, albertsons, winco, qfc, target, restaurant depot, the PX on base, top foods, there are just 10 of the outlets.. monolopy my vass...

76673429
Flag this comment

Mytake said on November 9, 2011 at 11:21 AM

freedomtroll your contract store will keep thier license. There are provisions in the bill for small towns. Just relax youll get your booze.

76673157
Flag this comment

Mytake said on November 9, 2011 at 11:16 AM

The state of washington was the biggest drug dealer in the state of washington. Now the drug dealin is private where it should be. The state will take the drug dollars in the form of taxes. My question is why is booze the only drug we do this with?? Theres LOTS more to be made in the drug and dope business.

76672759
Flag this comment

waituhminute said on November 9, 2011 at 11:14 AM

Bwaahahahahahaa! Awesome! Finally prohibition is over!! BTW, all you Costco haters will still go there and clamber over toddlers just to get your free sample of taquito cut with scissors and fillup on cheap gas! This negativity will blow over soon YEs voters, fear not! BTW, Costco is a local company and I support local business wholeheartedly! Also,, what makes a State Employee more responsible in the sale of liquor!? Seriously? So everyone who isn't a State Employee is too stupid to sell liquor? Why didn't the No voters put out ads that said just that? Because that's basically what you were saying and the voters responded in force! So go home and drink your tea and grind your teeth. Now you can focus on b!tching about the cost overruns on the Seattle Chunnel !! Cheers, waituhminute

76672654
Flag this comment

freemonttroll said on November 9, 2011 at 11:13 AM

"A retail store must have ten thousand square feet or more in order to get a license to sell liquor" - It occurred to me, what will small towns all over the state do? Take Skykomish for example, they have a general store that also contracts to sell liquor. Under this law, they will not be able to sell as they do not meet the square footage requirements. - So the question is... Where will Skykomish folks go to buy liquor? I don't think a lot of people thought about that... There are many small towns that will be faced with the same. I think this law will effectively take the monopoly away from the state and move it to Costco.

76672538
Flag this comment

dorimonsonfan said on November 9, 2011 at 10:58 AM

GREAT NEWS! If drunks are driving shorter distances to get their booze we will have SAFER roads. The last people I want driving all over town to get booze are drunks. Better they can walk to the corner store for whiskey.

76671438
Flag this comment

goamerica said on November 9, 2011 at 10:56 AM

Look people... those (alcoholics, teenagers, etc....) that want liquor WILL GET liquor whether or not it is privatized. Thank you to Costco for buying this election, we needed it. It's about freedoms. The NO's (left) ran a weak campaign and couldn't justify to the people why we shouldn't privatize our liquor sales. There won't be an increase in deaths, there won't be an increase in alcoholism, etc. etc.. Your scare tactics didn't work this time. DEAL WITH IT !!

76671293
Flag this comment

poedoldman said on November 9, 2011 at 10:55 AM

Costco bought the election with 6 dollars to every registered voter? I must have missed my 6 bucks in the mail. All I got was a notice that my dues were going up. You are an idiot if you think Costco bought the votes, and you probably blame Tim for 'passing' every initiative that he pushes. Voters pass them at the polls, no where else. If the vote didn't go your way, man up and deal with it instead of crying like a baby and forecasting the end of the world as we know it.

76671198
Flag this comment

pixelater said on November 9, 2011 at 10:53 AM

andyblue555 said on November 9, 2011 at 9:42 AM It sounds like a tea party convention here.. Big Gobment bad. Alcohol gooood. It was a lot more than 6.00 per person spent by Costco. More alcohol... More drunks... More death....... For profit.. *** Do you have facts and statistics to back up your claims? Or are you trying to make your point with fear mongering and speculation. Come on man; point us to your irrefutable statistics and sources of information.

76671032
Flag this comment

andyblue555 said on November 9, 2011 at 10:53 AM

andyblue555 avatar

Will Costco at least supply flowers for the funerals of people killed by drunk drivers... Nope they will distance themselves when the drunk driving deaths increase. One thing to look forward to is more drunk driving stings and the income that will generate. Its like dangling candy in front of a child. I don't drink myself but I will be the first to call police if I even see a car swerving or driving erratically just to catch the pro alcohol for profit voters when they think they can get away with driving drunk. We are gonna catch you and catch you goood... Its going to cost YOU plenty. .

76671029
Flag this comment

risa77 said on November 9, 2011 at 10:52 AM

Yoeman: and just how is the store going to know an adult is buying for a minor, other than asking? At which point the adult will claim "no". Is the clerk supposed to follow the adult out of the store to check? And if the adult goes to a different location to give the alcohol to a minor, how is the store supposed to know that? The adult should be punished, not the store.

76670926
Flag this comment

andyblue555 said on November 9, 2011 at 10:42 AM

andyblue555 avatar

It sounds like a tea party convention here.. Big Gobment bad. Alcohol gooood. It was a lot more than 6.00 per person spent by Costco. More alcohol... More drunks... More death....... For profit.

76670372
Flag this comment

gottabebacon said on November 9, 2011 at 10:34 AM

Now how long will it be before the losing side files suit to overturn the new law based on some obscure legal precedent, only delaying the inevitable and wasting tax dollars on legal fees.

76669851
Flag this comment

AJ_Arrows2f4 said on November 9, 2011 at 10:25 AM

Anytime the government is forced to stay out of our personal lives, it is good news.

76669273
Flag this comment

yeoman said on November 9, 2011 at 10:18 AM

Congrats to Costco and the other Supermarket. Everyone talks about more drunk driver on the road; we are still going to have drunks on the roads that a fact. I read an earlier comment saying a 10k fine for selling to minor, that good but it should include adults who buy for minor, 2nd offense another 10k fine and loss of license for 5 years the whole chain of stores and if there is a third offense license revoked for life and this would go for adults buying for minors also. The state is in such a crisis that saving rent on 387 store along with the power, water, phone service, card readers for credit card and yes employee wages will save taxpayer and the state will still receive revenue from the 1400 new store that will be created.

76668754
Flag this comment

shoreline said on November 9, 2011 at 10:10 AM

collegeguy, what people are going to lose their checker jobs or be reassigned. All those under 21 year old checkers seem to be able to sell me a bottle of wine or beer at the store. This won't have any effect on young people's jobs that I can see.

76668269
Flag this comment

dot7866532883480 said on November 9, 2011 at 9:59 AM

I am so happy the Law passed. Too bad i stopped drinking in 1998.

76667539
Flag this comment

Sir_Real said on November 9, 2011 at 9:58 AM

Basically greedy corporations out of state spent 12 million on those NO ads to turn our local staple, Costco, into a villain. As seen, you guys below ate it up.. though some of you might be plants from those corporations.

76667419
Flag this comment

ss427 said on November 9, 2011 at 9:56 AM

I have two favorite stores. Home Depot and most of all, BY FAR, Costco. Our store in Silverdale is the 13th built. We've been members since it opened. Not once have we been mistreated in anyway. This business, locally created, is on the Dow-30 like Boeing. There's a reason for that. This corporation treats customers fairly but most of all their employees come first. What's wrong with this picture? Nothing.

76667328
Flag this comment

ameso said on November 9, 2011 at 9:38 AM

Costco spending $6 for every voter is cheap when you compare that to the $81 the state was proposing to spend by PAYING a private company up to $300 million to take over distribution. The state is certainly not more efficient.

76666086
Flag this comment

SMHATYOU said on November 9, 2011 at 9:35 AM

andyblue, how do you explain our state as having a higher drunk driving rate than California? ............

76665883
Flag this comment

gottabebacon said on November 9, 2011 at 9:30 AM

Every election is bought, just a matter of how much. Welcome to the USA.

76665557
Flag this comment

notasheeple said on November 9, 2011 at 9:30 AM

Firstly ALL elections are bought, a primary reason that the homeless are not often seen "running" for office, and how about the $80 million the state said it cost to have their 1,000 jobs? They overpay their "favored contractors" and the employees, benefits are quite costly. It was extremely hard to equate the monopoly ownership of the liquor sales to the rules concerning there not supposing to be any monopolies in the public market. When an employee like the governor spends millions to acquire a, what(?) 200,000k a year job, something is going on, when they "somehow" manage to gather in a million a year in income from a 200k/yr job, then you are seeing skimming, kickbacks, etc, etc.... like the 10 billion $ tunnel to never-ending debt, great grandkids wil still bhe paying that off, of course the kickbacks that got it locked in worked pretty well, ESPECIALLY as you guys are paying for it all, 10 billion and they only created a couple hundred jobs, heh-heh.

76665564
Flag this comment

gottabebacon said on November 9, 2011 at 9:16 AM

Finally!

76664704
Flag this comment

andyblue555 said on November 9, 2011 at 9:15 AM

andyblue555 avatar

This drunk driving death bought and paid for by Costco inc. Boycott Costco for BUYING our election.

76664637
Flag this comment

ballardgal said on November 9, 2011 at 9:10 AM

When I moved here from Colorado years ago, I'd never heard of the state owning the liquor stores. It was privatized in Colorado. Yes, Costco sold it. In huge cage-like inserts like a separate store inside. And other stores sold it. It WASN'T easier for kids to get a hold of because the store owners were more diligent with ID-checking, as they didn't want to lose their license. If anything, I thought it was bizarre to have wine in grocery stores because outside of a liquor store in Colorado, 3.2% beer was the highest you could get. And that "reduction of choices" argument is ridiculous. Private stores will be better able to cope with special orders. I can name at least 3 different imports I could find back in CO that the "state" liquor stores here weren't even willing to special order for me.

76664326
Flag this comment

thecrankster said on November 9, 2011 at 9:08 AM

No way will this leftist state let 1000 votes for dems oh i mean government workers be fired.

76664173
Flag this comment

whatsyurbeef said on November 9, 2011 at 9:06 AM

Should make the drunks real happy.

76664058
Flag this comment

collegeguy said on November 9, 2011 at 8:57 AM

I mainly have issues with a company buying an election. I sure hope someone picks up the state run stores and keeps the variety that they have. I don't believe that this is a good idea more because unless this eased restrictions on the age requirement to be able to sell alcohol, anyone under 21 will lose their jobs or have to be reassigned from their jobs as checkers and what not, making it harder for our young people to get jobs. That means more of them will no longer have something to do and possibly end up doing things that we may not like or resorting to making money in ways we don't want them to. Just a side effect that no one ever talked about.

76663507
Flag this comment

bluesdudewa said on November 9, 2011 at 8:49 AM

Sheesh people, you would think Washington is the first State ever to privatize sales! Most States (32 out of 50) do not have State Run or "Controlled/monopoloy" liquor sales.

76663043
Flag this comment

bluesdudewa said on November 9, 2011 at 8:43 AM

awesome! "I'll have a Costco dog and a fifth of Crown Royal please!

76662722
Flag this comment

c8lsonics said on November 9, 2011 at 8:26 AM

@wesleyt "It will lead to easier access to hard liquor by minors" Enlighten us. How did you come to this conclusion?

76661669
Flag this comment

slappywag said on November 9, 2011 at 8:20 AM

It's about freakin time. The state should NOT be involved in the drug business. We have spoken. Game the F over.

76661259
Flag this comment

wesleyt said on November 9, 2011 at 8:08 AM

This costco bill is actually putting 2,000 people out of work. It will lead to easier access to hard liquor by minors, but hey, as long as the so called 'voters' think they can get cheaper booze, then to hell with common sense. Now those millions in profit will go to retaielrsinstead of the state coffers. Gee that makes perfect sense doesn't it? The price could actually increase by as much as 27%, so get ready for that folks. I assume this will be appealed and will take a long time to implement, or at least I hope it does. We have allowed a private enterprise to buy an election, but in such a backward liberal state that isn't really suprising, just pathetic...

76660409
Flag this comment

Michael_W_Ha284 said on November 9, 2011 at 8:04 AM

@garmo98... Don't be an idiot! I'd be happy to offer you a complete refund of your membership fee. Looking forward to the increased business!

76660257
Flag this comment

SMHATYOU said on November 9, 2011 at 7:55 AM

garmo98, you won't be missed! Don't let the door hit ya on the way out!!! :)

76659704
Flag this comment

tabloidreporter said on November 9, 2011 at 7:52 AM

Everyone out their trying to blame Costco for dui deaths are morans. Are the responsible for fat people because they sell cookies and candy, lung cancer.because they carry smokes, alcoholism because they carry wine, and beer? Whatever happened to people being responsible for their own actions. I guess that went away when it became illegal to spank little Johnny when was caught stealing candy. Now he's given a timeout. Society is now reflective of this idiotic thinking. Wake-up before its to late.

76659526
Flag this comment

Gixxer said on November 9, 2011 at 7:47 AM

At least it will be easier for kids to obtain hard alcohol now. I know in my day we would do grab and run for cases of beer. A bottle is so easy to conceal, you wont even have to run anymore. Prices should also go up, considering the tax on the liquor will not change and the private companies will need to make a profit.

76659224
Flag this comment

pixelater said on November 9, 2011 at 7:38 AM

@ andyblue555, using your logic that corporations are responsible for individuals actions not the people themselves then you must think McDonalds, Burger King and KFC are responsible for fat people. Maybe the state should be in the business of selling fast foods.

76658694
Flag this comment

stonetrails said on November 9, 2011 at 6:32 AM

stonetrails avatar

Smaller outlets have been selling hard liquor in other states for years. It's no big deal outside WA. I doubt it's going to accelerate the already galloping moral decay and debauchery among babysitters, the elderly and teenagers. Lighten up, the voters have spoken.

76655114
Flag this comment

invalid said on November 9, 2011 at 4:49 AM

@freemonttroll: The number is about 1,000, not tens of thousands. And it's nice that people could see through the "vote no because BIG CORPORATIONS! PROFITS! DEMOCRACY FOR SALE!" campaign. There was no good reason for the state to be in the liquor business. If you believe that the state should be selling liquor, then maybe we should also have had state-run smoke shops, eh? Heck, why have any private enterprise at all? Yeah, that's the ticket. Let the state do it all. That should work great.

76651582
Flag this comment

dakotanative said on November 9, 2011 at 4:42 AM

Tens of thousands. That is funny.

76651428
Flag this comment

rnl52 said on November 9, 2011 at 4:19 AM

@yessir.....and you can drink all that liquor in Costa Rica.

76651011
Flag this comment

yessir said on November 9, 2011 at 1:14 AM

Costco will be carrying it all now... candy's dandy... but liquor's quicker

76648363
Flag this comment

freemonttroll said on November 9, 2011 at 12:39 AM

@garmo98 - Amen! I'm right there with you.. It's sad that 10's of thousands are going to be unemployed over the convenience to buy a bottle of Jack.

76647798
Flag this comment

Sir_Real said on November 9, 2011 at 12:31 AM

You could tell the No campaign was funded out of state.. Never seen Costco vilified like Wal-mart like if it were a foreign entity before those commercials. Unlike Wal-mart, when the No people crafted those commercials, they forgot we know Costco as local staple of WA state. They woulda had better luck trying to get voters to approve an Airbus contract over Boeing.

76647614
Flag this comment

gregbulmash said on November 9, 2011 at 12:24 AM

Love all the uninformed opinions about how traffic deaths will go up. California has had vodka in supermarkets for decades, but WA has a higher percentage of its traffic fatalities coming from alcohol-related accidents. If traffic deaths from alcohol go up, it means Washington has to admit Californian's either have more self-control or hold their liquor better. The 18% fortified wines and 9% malt liquors in the mini-marts are cheaper per ounce of pure alcohol than most 40% hard alcohol, and the wines taste better. Most people who drive drunk didn't get that way from their own liquor cabinets. They got trashed at a party or a bar, and taking the state out of the liquor business doesn't change that one bit.

76647487
Flag this comment

tgrumpy110 said on November 8, 2011 at 11:46 PM

I think it is just stupid, but hey why should costco care we will have more accidents and deaths from people driving drunk,They just made it easier for kds to get it so more of are young people can drive drunk,bad enough adults do it. Very sad day for us in Washington, The voters never saw it coming

76646813
Flag this comment

garmo98 said on November 8, 2011 at 11:44 PM

Congratulations Costco! In celebration of your purchase of this election I took out a sharp pair of scissors ans cut up my membership card.

76646761
Flag this comment

likenight said on November 8, 2011 at 11:38 PM

I am amazed that people talk about the 52% markup! Half of that went to taxes and the other half went to operations. the only change the voters made was to give Costco and the other stores the operations half. You will still be paying the 52% markup give or take as the taxes are still there. You didnt think Costco was going to give it away for free did you? Most of the voters didnt even know that it was scheduled to go down to 39%. Ignorance is bliss i guess. Should put this on failblog.

76646657
Flag this comment

izzy1968 said on November 8, 2011 at 11:31 PM

Andyblue555, you got it right.... all these people saying how it was dark ages etc of prohibition by WA state... well gee, do any of these twit voters really think Costco has WA state citizens' best interest at heart here?? They are a corporation... you mean nothing but a pickled liver that they can later sell in bulk!

76646531
Flag this comment

andyblue555 said on November 8, 2011 at 11:29 PM

andyblue555 avatar

Yay... more drunk driving deaths can be attributed to Costco and the 22 Million they invested to put more alcohol everywhere. Whats human life when there is profit to be made.

76646482
Flag this comment

Mytake said on November 8, 2011 at 11:28 PM

Now the state of washington is NOT the biggest drug dealer in the state of washington!

76646449
Flag this comment

Irish4God said on November 8, 2011 at 10:42 PM

We are finally out of the dark ages and Washington State will go back to being OUT of the liquor sales business which was a monopoly! Good job fellow voters. ;)

76645404
Flag this comment

likenight said on November 8, 2011 at 10:41 PM

Good job voters! With no guarantee of the the state getting anymore money to fund support you still voted it thru. But then again it doesnt seem like any of you could do the math anyway. For the state to get more money, liquor sales would have to increase by 50% based on lower tax revenue on lower prices. If the goal was to sell more liquor then by all means go ahead and vote it through. If you think increased fines will stop underage drinking, then you are just fooling yourself. the majority of consumption by minors is thru theft, either from a store or from parents. Of course it will be much easier to steal liquor from Safeway than it is from the liquor store and seeing as we should see an increase in sales, that means increase in availibilty for minors at home. I just hope that no one is hurt by another drunk driver on the road or that no ones child is either. It didnt seem as if it was that hard to buy liquor, or even that expensive.

76645368
Flag this comment

noskills said on November 8, 2011 at 10:30 PM

@nick22 Some of those employees will find work when Bevmo opens up stores here. Im sure there will be a few Bevmos ready to open by the time this law takes effect.

76645156
Flag this comment

maryannmarrs said on November 8, 2011 at 10:09 PM

And just watch how Olympia will use the revenues from the sale of liquor to fund more special projects and there STILL won't be enough money for education, health, and law enforcement. There was nothing in the initiative that stated exactly where the taxes would be targeted, and even if there was, Olympia always seems to know better than the taxpayers and would funnel it to build a bridge in the middle of the desert or repave a road that was repaved last year (or even build tunnels for the deer to cross the freeway so we don't hit them). Olympia just got a raise (even though I voted for this one) and more "play money". Let's see how they spend it on garbage.

76644611
Flag this comment

shadedmuse said on November 8, 2011 at 9:58 PM

Only Two Counties are voting No and they are down in Southeast corner, what is Clarkston, where the Cosco is, what do people do down their cross the Snake river and buy cheap booze in Idaho? with privatization we will be seeing peeople in Lewiston cross the snake and buy cheap booze at Clarston Cosco, what is next to Wall-Mart Supcentre and Albertsons so their will be three stores selling the Cheap Hooch, Now Cosco could mark up the pries so they get the Profits rather then the state.

76644273
Flag this comment

maninwa said on November 8, 2011 at 9:58 PM

I guess prohibition after decades is now over! We are growing up. Congratulations WA, the majority of the state is smart enough to get it. And we will no longer be ripped off by big out of state distribution companies. Congratulations.

76644248
Flag this comment

nick22 said on November 8, 2011 at 9:55 PM

Good now the state can't take the liquor money away from the cities as they were planning to as part of the budget cuts. This saved a lot of jobs at city governments I know some cities were waiting this one out before handing out layoff notices. I do feel for the liquor store employees and wish there was a guarantee of a job at one of the places that will be selling liquor.

76644186
Flag this comment

shoreline said on November 8, 2011 at 9:54 PM

Good job voters! Now lets follow up with tougher penalties for selling alcohol to minors. 1st offense, $10,000 fine. 2nd offense, loss of liquor license. Make selling to minors a big enough hit and it won't become a problem. All it's gonna take is one or two examples of stores losing thier ability to sell alcohol and the others will toe the line.

76644119
Flag this comment

keithc said on November 8, 2011 at 9:53 PM

About time Washington voters pulled their heads out.

76644082
Flag this comment

hewhoo said on November 8, 2011 at 9:50 PM

On November 1, 2011 at 4:53 PM K5 said: "Polls show this is a very tight race and there are still plenty of undecided voters out there." You also said, in the same article that it "was too close to call'. Who hired the pollsters for you guys? I'd like to know who they were so I can avoid hiring them....

76643913
Flag this comment

AlanOnMI said on November 8, 2011 at 9:44 PM

We've waited since December 5, 1933 to get Olympia out of this business where they had no business in the first place!

76643717
Flag this comment

wolves50 said on November 8, 2011 at 9:43 PM

Here here!

76643692
Flag this comment

Sir_Real said on November 8, 2011 at 9:37 PM

Go Costco, Congratulations!

76643459
Flag this comment