The knee-jerk, government-shouldn’t-be-in-the-booze-business crowd will have plenty to drink to when Costco’s $22 million Initiative 1183 wins tonight—and it will win, by a comfortable margin—but you booze-hounds are missing the bigger picture: Washington’s initiative process is now officially open to the highest corporate bidder.
Yeah, I know, it’s been heading in that direction since Tim Eyman first made a lucrative profession of it back in the late 1990s, but I-1183 and last year’s Coke & Pepsi sponsored I-1107 mark a turning point in our history when large corporations finally started spending tens of millions of dollars in pursuit of hundreds of millions of dollars in returns. It’s great for stockholders, but will ultimately prove to be a disaster for the citizens of Washington state, when corporate interests with unlimited resources dive into the business of directly marketing to voters self-serving policies that could never survive a deliberative legislative process.
But, you know, I’m rational enough to admit defeat. And since we have neither the political will nor skill to reform the initiative process, from here on out it will only get worse. Yet another way in which Washington, politically, is totally fucked.
So enjoy the hundreds of millions of extra dollars Costco will ultimately earn from selling jugs of Kirkland brand vodka in Washington state, Mr. Sinegal, but don’t you ever again pretend that you are some sort of responsible corporate citizen, because you’re not. And you’ll never get another dime of my business again.
More in NEWS
Local (and not-so-local) news from your favorite writers.
It had to be said Goldy. Good on you.
Sorelose much?
@101: Or, perhaps the audience here isn’t cut out for reading journalism…? Hmm….
I look forward to making and drinking my first margarita since I moved into this silly state-government-nanny-controlling-alcoholic-establishment place…. and I’ll enjoy it. And it’ll be with ingredients from Costco. And I’ll be sure to make up for Goldy’s lack of shopping there, I’m sure.
@107 thats it Goldy. Keep insulting us. Way to get people to your side.
@81, because you can have small, specialist liquor stores in CA. Last time I was in CA I visited a BevMo (the only new kind of business that might crop up here given 10k square footage requirement) last time I was in CA. Bunch of crap it had. Aisles of margarita mixes. No local producers featured anywhere.
@89, what universe are you living in where the beer selection at QFC is “good?”
Goldy is teasing you girls.
The real reason he doesn’t shop at Costco anymore is that he was banned after he exposed himself to those little girls there last year….
@110 You must have the strangest definition of what “crap” is. Go look at Bevmo’s web site and you tell me you can’t find something you would want.
Hmmm, Goldy is getting to be the new ECB, and it’s still about alcohol.
Seriously, Goldy, what IS your problem? Why not blame the courts for allowing paid signature gathers? That’s the real issue. Did you mind the SEIU getting 1163 on the ballot? Or is your anger just directed at measures you don’t like?
Your consistency is just like Tim Eyman’s, who screams about the “will of the people” over 1125, but conveniently forgets such measures at automatic teacher pay increases, class size, minimum wage, etc.
@110
screw you, I sell awesome fucking beer to the QFC at North Broadway. a lot of the beer/wine buyers who actually stock the shelves at these places are incredibly knowledgeable people who are doing these jobs because they’re enthusiastic about the product. I know the same can’t be said about Safeway…nearly every one I’ve set foot in has the same selection of both import and domestic beer, but from QFC to Metropolitan, Whole Foods to Town & Country (Ballard Market, Central Market in Shoreline, etc) there are people who do some really ambitious alcohol programs. to assume that bigger stores wouldn’t be able to cultivate that with liquor as well is naive and/or dishonest.
also, I assure you that the people who are already running boutique bottle shops in the region have already started looking into any loopholes they can use to get into this as well. at least if they have any sense of business savvy and self-preservation that is.
@113: Talk to the folks at SEIU and ask them where I stand on the initiative process. They love it, and they know I would repeal it immediately if made benevolent dictator for a day.
That said, this is the hand I’m dealt, so I’ll support and oppose initiatives one by one. But I’m entirely consistent in believing that it’s a stupid way to write legislation… just as stupid as godfuckingmoronic system of electing judges.
@107, no, you buried your point in your bitching about just Costco. Had you, maybe, included Kemper and the Toll Initiative, and the SEIU grab at the state general fund, and not focused on never going to Costco again, you might have a point about calling this journalism.
The way you have franed this, it’s complaining about one of your pets losing at the ballot box.
@66: ones => one’s
is a => is as
Hope this helps; have a nice day. If you’re going to get on a high horse about someone being on a high horse about a typo, uh…yeah. Good luck with that.
Goldy: I agree. After 7 years in Seattle, I now live in a place with no initiative/referendum process. Our politics are a whole lot saner. There are many reasons we have representative democracy, and short-circuiting it is never going to lead to a better society.
@115,
I’m in total agreement with you on the moronic nature of the initiative process – at least since the Supremes said that it was OK to pay signature gatherers. Also in agreement on the moronicness of electing judges.
“Hand dealt”-wise though, you’re still arguing the merits of a change in law, irrespective of the mechanism. Your arguments against 1125 remain inconsistent, illogical, and (though moot at this point), wrong-headed.
Still and all, you *do* slam the initiative process citing outcomes you don’t like – while failing to sling similar arrows against initiative driven changes in law that you *do* like. Costco is “big money”, yep. So is SEIU.
I voted “yes” both times on the SEIU “no-brainer” measures, by the way – not because of who backs and who opposes, but because it’s common-sense law.
Costco spent more on this initiative than has ever been spent in the state’s history on an initiative. For what? Costco as good corporate citizen just trying to let Washingtonians buy booze for less? What great corporate citizens! I suspect we’ll see many more initiatives paid for simply to increase corporate profits. Sad.
That’s it. I quit drinking. I’m boycotting booze from now on.
You hate booze. I hate democracy. The initiative process is inherently broken. This proves nothing.
@117, if you would care to read two posts later you will see I made a correction to my typos. Ass.
This reminds me: I need to renew the Costco membership.
As a union member, government employee, and person who goes to a liquor store once every decade (I’m a wino, not a boozer) I am happy to see this pass. Just as utilities were rightfully told to get out of the appliance sales and service business because it was unfair competition with the private sector, the state should get out of the retail liquor business.
Plus, it is hopefully the beginning of the end of the ridiculous “enforcement” arm, and their arcane rules about things like porn in bars and booze in strip clubs. All of that should be dealt with on the local level, through zoning and law enforcement.
I voted against this initiave for one reason alone ( No I dont believe either side about underage drinking OR more money going to blah blah) I voted against it because our liquor store is a beautiful wonderful fun place to go!I We just got a brand new store and the people who are working it ( NOW UNEMPLOYED!!!!) are so nice and knowledgable and I love to go in there a few times a month and try something new. You think your local grocer is going to carry BakonVodka? Or those packs that make wonderful Christmas gifts.. or those cute little airplane size bottles?? Just because the local grocer can sell alcohol doesnt mean they will! You may suddenly find yourself 50 miles from your fav brand of whatever. Or that obscure exotic liquor you recently discovered and now love..( Absinthe comes to mind). You think mom and pop are gonna carry it? Think again. I love(ed) Costco but its 100 miles round trip from me and heck if I am going that distance to buy whatever they decide to carry. My (increased) membership is due.. not gonna do it.
@ 124, you registered now, just to post THAT? Your liquor store employed friend ALREADY got their pink slips? I smell a shill.
@124: I’m sure amazing high-end liquor stores will step in to fill the void… probably still at lower price points and without the cold war era decor.
Am I the only one who will have LESS access to booze once this goes through? There are no 10,000 sq ft stores near me (in the U-District). Hopefully the liquor store on 45th gets purchased by an independent contractor..
@124 – um, just on absinthe alone, here’s what BevMo has at ONE of their outlets:
http://www.bevmo.com/Shop/ProductList.as…
Everything from a $10 bottle (yuk!) to a $78 bottle. Lots of choices.
Anyone who thinks BevMo and Liquor Barn and the like have not been watching this initiative VERY VERY closely is deluded. Anyone who thinks they don’t already have retail locations in mind is very likely wrong. Bring on my BevMo.
But my real question is, can we now make personal purchases of liquor over the internet?
@124: If there’s a market for that bounty the state liquor stores offered (?) then why wouldn’t entrepreneurs open stores to meet that demand? I think they will, just as they have in so many other states. And they’ll need employees as well.
And if there ISN’T such a market, then what was the state doing spending tax money all these years? And sorry, but it isn’t the state’s job to provide jobs for sales clerks.
Just glanced at the actual Initiative (pdf warning: slow download). Lots of issues:
1) Looks like liquor stores licenses (for current state stores) will be auctioned off and the winner can’t be denied based on size, location of a replacement store (so much for that 10k restriction).
2) Money to buy out all those existing contracts will come out of the revenue that was supposed to go to enforcement. So much for extra monies in the near future.
3)The Liquor Control Board will be overwhelmed trying to implement this in the time frame given.
4) Almost anybody can be a distributer?? Someone tell me I missed something, aren’t they limiting the number of distributors?
My god some of you people are so predictably dense. All one has to do is utter “corporate profit”, and everyone farts loose stool all over themselves. Sometimes, you know, it’s OK for corporations to make money selling us the goods and services we want. Especially if they can do it better than anyone else (or the state) can. Costco is gonna make money on the deal… yep, they sure are. So’re Safeway, and Kroger (QFC), and Liquor Barn and BevMo will be here in short order too. This is GOOD! There will be competition to drive prices down. There will be less government involvement in policing our vices, and hopefully they’ll start working on building policies that matter. Oh, and parents might actually have to take some fucking responsibility for their shitty little brat kids… and if they don’t, then their shitty little brat kids will drink too much and die. Win-win.
Goldy is like one of those crabby, bitchy curmudgeons you see in coffee shops, except half their age. He rants and if not for being an otherwise functioning member of society you’d swear he was some street nutcase.
I’m sure Goldy won’t have to worry about Costco once this measure takes effect and he wants to buy a bottle of liquor, since most of the city’s supermarkets will also stock liquor, plus we may see a few specialty private liquor stores.
As for bitching about someone buying the initiative process… hey, where the fuck have you been, Goldy? Tim Eyman’s backers have been buying the process for over a decade. If you don’t like people spending money to manipulate the process, I’d recommend lobbying to have the initiative process terminated… because as long as it exists it’s always going to happen. Elections at all levels are won by the money of rich people.
@133: Honestly? Really? Do you know anything about me?
@127, The Ave has a Safeway at 50th. Whatever is at 4321 University Way (which has been Tower Records, Tiger Tiger and a used bookstore) is 10,000 sq ft and right on the Ave and stumbling distance to dorms. The old drug store (now vacant?) next to Pagliacci on the 4500 block is close to 10k, I believe. Any number of Ave storefronts, all of which have huge turnover, could be re-combined for a 10,000 sq ft location. The Ave used to have JC Penneys, Sears, and Nordstrom, but when dept store retail left, those spaces were divided. Just recombine them. Multi-story counts, not just the ground.
A big issue for a U District store is whether the landlord (the UW owns most surrounding property) wants liquor as a lessee.
Read my last paragraph again, Goldy, and connect the dots. If Tim Eyman and Costco are problems, it’s because the process enables it.
@38:
So you don’t like the initiative process, and your solution is to boycott Costco? Yeah, that’ll do the trick. And you have the balls to call everyone else stupid?
I have a very unpopular opinion on money spent in elections that most people disagree with.
I’m tired of voters always talking about how money buys elections. Everyone thinks that they are immune to the big money campaign tactics but that the millions of other “stupid” voters don’t have the same intelligence as they do. I have more faith in the other voters than most, I guess. Yes, I know that most winning campaigns over the last few decades have been the campaign that spends more money. I think we get the causal relationship behind money-spent and elections-won wrong. I think corporations and politicians do, as well… which is why Costco is willing to spend $20 million on this campaign. I think they believe that this will buy them the election. I honestly think they could have won without spending this much though because I think they wrote an initiative that aligned with the people better than the opposition.
I didn’t vote for 1183 because I don’t like a lot of the deregulation that comes with it. I have no problem with being able to buy liquor in a grocery store or a 7-11. I just don’t like the pricing deregulation that accompanies this initiative. However, I do hate the fact that this somehow aligns me with the opposition and their dishonest scare tactics.
I honestly don’t think that bars, restaurants, or grocery stores will sell to the consumers for less than the consumer is currently paying… the price point has been set. I don’t see any benefit to the consumer. If we do end up paying less money, I don’t believe that the state will somehow get more revenue either. We pay less, the state makes more, and there’s a bunch of money for the corporations… something just doesn’t add up there.
I don’t fault the initiative process. I actually think it would easier for corporations to buy elected officials than it would be to write an initiative that the people will vote for. I wish that initiatives were written by the people, for the people – not by corporations, for corporations – but I don’t blame the initiative process.
I have a very unpopular opinion on money spent in elections that most people disagree with.
I’m tired of voters always talking about how money buys elections. Everyone thinks that they are immune to the big money campaign tactics but that the millions of other “stupid” voters don’t have the same intelligence as they do. I have more faith in the other voters than most, I guess. Yes, I know that most winning campaigns over the last few decades have been the campaign that spends more money. I think we get the causal relationship behind money-spent and elections-won wrong. I think corporations and politicians do, as well… which is why Costco is willing to spend $20 million on this campaign. I think they believe that this will buy them the election. I honestly think they could have won without spending this much though because I think they wrote an initiative that aligned with the people better than the opposition.
I didn’t vote for 1183 because I don’t like a lot of the deregulation that comes with it. I have no problem with being able to buy liquor in a grocery store or a 7-11. I just don’t like the pricing deregulation that accompanies this initiative. However, I do hate the fact that this somehow aligns me with the opposition and their dishonest scare tactics.
I honestly don’t think that bars, restaurants, or grocery stores will sell to the consumers for less than the consumer is currently paying… the price point has been set. I don’t see any benefit to the consumer. If we do end up paying less money, I don’t believe that the state will somehow get more revenue either. We pay less, the state makes more, and there’s a bunch of money for the corporations… something just doesn’t add up there.
I don’t fault the initiative process. I actually think it would be easier for corporations to buy elected officials than it would be to write an initiative that the people will vote for. I wish that initiatives were written by the people, for the people – not by corporations, for corporations – but I don’t blame the initiative process.
@137: When did I ever say anything about calling for a “boycott.” I’m never shopping there again, because I can’t in good conscience spend my money at a company that, for its own selfish reasons, has set such a dangerous precedent for our state. But you’re all free to spend your money as you see fit.
@135 that’s the other funny thing. People are acting like 10,000 sq ft commercial real estate is so hard to find–that’s laughable. It’s 100×100 feet. Retail like that, especially as you say for multi story, is trivial. Hell, the upper area alone at the old Borders at Westlake, for scale, is probably what–20,000 to 30,000 square feet?
@135, yeah, I just looked at this commercial MLS site:
http://www.commercialmls.com
For lease-only properties in Seattle with at least 10,000 square feet. These sites, if they’re anything like residential MLS, will only show at best 1/4 to 1/3 of the real listings. Maybe less. And I still found 43 hits. Example: 12,000 square feet, a block off Westlake: ta da. One of many. The current real estate market couldn’t come at a better time for I-1183.
Fuck Costco. I like flats of cheap pineapple and diced tomatoes, but I’m damned if I’m going to buy them from a bunch of fucking fascists.
@143: “a bunch of fucking fascists”
Really? Jesus fucking christ.
I’m not exactly happy with the initiative, and their influence, but it was inevitable. People weren’t tricked into voting, and the 10000 sq foot rule was accepted by the voters. What’s your problem?