What You Should Know: Initiative 1100 & 1105

Over the next week or two we’ll be bringing you some brief rundowns of the major initiatives on your ballot. If you are a registered voter--and by now you really should be--your ballot should being arriving momentarily.

First up, I-1100 and I-1105, two initiatives trying to privatize the state’s liquor system. You may think it’s an easy choice. It shouldn’t be.

Proponents of both initiatives argue that the distribution and selling of liquor is not an essential state service and the state shouldn’t be in the business of selling such things as Jack Daniels or Monarch Vodka. Instead, establishments that sell beer and wine should be allowed to purchase liquor licenses and sell liquor themselves.

I-1100 (written by Costco) would get rid of the state’s three-tiered system - which regulates manufacturers, distributors, and retailers and prohibits bulk discounts - and abolish the state markup on liquor. I-1105 would keep the three-tiered system in tact - though would strip both the liquor markup and the current liquor tax. I-1105 recommends that the legislature enact a new per-liter tax to make up for lost revenue but doesn’t require or legally bind it to do so. Both initiatives are adamant that increased availability will lead to higher sales and more revenue; the number of establishments selling liquor could grow to 3,357.

Opponents of both initiatives have two lines of attack: public safety and state revenue. The first is arguably a little muddled. You can pull up data to support the idea that liquor sales will grow under a privatized system and lead to more social unrest, etc., if you want, but the data isn't conclusive or convincing. Still jumping from 300 liquor outlets to 3,300 could have some longterm social costs.

The state revenue argument carries more weight. The Office of Financial Management has estimated that I-1105 could cost the state half a billion dollars in lost revenue over five years; I-1100 would cost the state upwards of $85 million, and local governments up to $192 million. In a horrible fiscal environment for the state, one with a projected $4 billion shortfall, those numbers shouldn’t be shrugged off.

The bottom line: So take your pick or don’t pick at all. Washington’s liquor system may be a bit antiquated, but these initiatives may not have the state’s interest at heart. Yet it’s possible that the legislature may finally act to reform the liquor system in a responsible way once one of one of these passes (I-1100 has a chance), two years after an initiative runs its course.