Political Story: Initiative 1100

I-1100: Privatizing José and Jack in Washington State  

The ballot initiative 1100 has some Washington voters toasting to the possible changes, and making others fight to keep it off the table.

According to the ballot summary, the initiative will close state liquor stores and authorize the sale, distribution and importation of spirits by private parties, and repeal certain requirements that govern the business operations of beer and wine distributors and producers.

While the initiative takes away the state’s role in selling alcohol, the Liquor Control Board would issue licenses to business wishing to sell alcohol.

The president of the Washington Restaurant Association, Anthony Anton, spoke about his support of I-1100 in a visit to WSU on Oct. 12.

“Right now, the Liquor Control Board is understaffed in terms of regulation because so much emphasis is put on sales,” Anton said. “If the initiative passes, more time and energy can be spent on alcohol programs and policies.”

I-1100’s major supporter is Costco. The company was the main author of the initiative and has donated more than $535,000 to the campaign. Other supporters include Safeway and Kroger, as well as most restaurant associations in Washington.

 “[Initiative 1100] would allow restaurants to buy directly from distributors,” Anton said. “Restaurants would get more convenience at a lower price. And distributors know trends and provide better customer service than the state.”

Family values groups such as Keep Our Kids Safe and Protect Our Communities are major opponents of the initiative. They say that if more stores are able to sell hard alcohol, teens and problem drinkers will have more access to it. In a press release, Keep Our Kids Safe said that Washington now has a 94 percent compliance rate with no-sale to minors, while other states with privatized sales have compliance rates as low as 75 percent. The group argues that this will increase drunken driving accidents and fatalities.

However, Jennifer Schwartz, a WSU sociology professor, said in an e-mail that the initiative will not likely affect DUIs.

“The drink of choice among many drunk drivers tends to be beer rather than spirits, so it is possible that I-100 would have minimal impact on the amount of drunk driving given that it is focused on the regulation of liquor,” Schwartz said.

Another issue with I-1100 is the jobs that would be affected. Protect Our Communities said on its web site that more that 1,000 jobs would be lost if the Liquor Control Board was forced to lay off store employees. Many unions in Washington, such as firefighter’s and nurse’s unions, oppose the initiative because of the job losses. But Modernize Washington points out that those jobs would simply be turned over to the private sector, with jobs being created at grocery stores and distributors due to increased liquor sales.

Rosalyn Krueger, a junior hospitality major and employee at a Bellevue restaurant, is in support of the initiative. She also attended Anton’s presentation.

“My restaurant would be able to hire more people,” she said. “And if the Liquor Control Board got out of the business of selling alcohol, their employees could focus more on regulation. I’m voting in favor of I-1100.”

Kenzie Smernis, a senior education major, said she would appreciate the convenience that I-1100 would bring, but is still unsure how she is going to vote on Nov. 2.

“It would be easier buying alcohol from a grocery store, but I think making it more accessible to everyone in the state isn’t a very good idea,” Smernis said. “So I still don’t know how I feel [about I-1100].”