Get the Facts about Initiative 1183
True or False...
I-1183 provides vitally needed new revenues for state and local public services…
FALSE: While it is true that the corporate backers of I-1183 have changed their self-described “flawed” proposal from a year ago, there are still hidden consequences and costs to I-1183. Supporters claim that I-1183 would generate millions for the state. However, as the Office of Financial Management report notes, this doesn’t take into account the medical and legal costs associated with the passage of I-1183 and a rapid expansion of liquor sales.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently came out against privatizing liquor sales, contending it leads to a 48% increase in consumption. Here in Washington, a 2009 Justice Department study found that underage drinking cost the state more than $500 million annually in youth violence and traffic collisions. And a new CDC report found that excessive alcohol consumption cost the U.S. $224 billion in 2006. They recommended strategies to combat problem/binge drinking, which includes reducing the number of places that sell and serve alcohol.
I-1183 will create four times as many outlets selling liquor and supporters falsely claim that consumption will remain flat. While big box retailers make huge profits, we all pay the price for greater access to alcohol for minors, increased binge drinking, and increased drunk driving crashes—high costs that will be paid by our local and state governments.
I-1183 will prevent underage drinking and improves public safety…
FALSE: Even the sponsors of this measure called last year’s proposal flawed and know this measure would lead to increased youth drinking and increased costs for our public safety system. It only dedicates $10 million statewide toward public safety. When this amount is divided amongst all city and county governments, it’s impact will be negligible considering that the number of outlets will be expanded over four times the current amount and alcohol sales will be extended until 2 AM at many grocery stores. For example, when you divide up $10 million using the current distribution model of state liquor funds, the Chelan County government would receive approximately $24,000 in additional money dedicated to public safety to be split among police and fire departments. The Spokane County government under the same formula would receive just $132,000. Even one automobile crash due to drunk driving could cost well over this amount.
The fact is I-1183 does not provide any additional funds to the Liquor Control Board for enforcement and regulation of our liquor laws. The board employs 55 enforcement officers to regulate the 323 liquor stores that currently exist in Washington State. I-1183 allocates no additional funding for increased oversight--the same 55 officers will be tasked with regulating more than 1,400 private-sector liquor outlets that we will see if this measure passes.
I-1183 doubles penalties for selling to minors, but even this provision comes with a huge loophole. 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.
In Washington, kids are successful when buying alcohol in grocery and convenience stores 1 in 4 times. Our state liquor stores have a 96% enforcement rate—one of the best in the entire country. With state and local governments already cutting our public safety budgets, the last thing we need are laws that further increase the burden on our police and firefighters. That is why public safety organizations and officials have joined the campaign to oppose this initiative.
I-1183 will end the state’s monopoly and lower the cost of liquor…
FALSE: The big corporate backers of this measure say that it will end a state monopoly and increase funding for government programs. But this measure creates a brand new 27 percent tax on retailers and distributors—costs that will be passed on to consumers, unfairly increasing the burden on regular Washingtonians. It’s time for the big corporations to start paying their fair share instead of forcing us to carry the load for them.
In a recent radio interview backers of this initiative admitted that this plan would likely not lead to lower liquor prices. The OFM report on I-1183 clearly states: “the fiscal impact cannot be precisely estimated because the private market will determine bottle cost and markup for spirits.” They 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%. The current state markup is 52%, only 3 points higher than the lowest estimate for private retailers. Supporters of the measure who stand to make huge profits off of the sale of alcohol claim that the state will see greater revenues, as consumption remains flat and prices drop—this is mathematically impossible.
Under I-1183, liquor retailers would have to be at least 10,000-square feet to be eligible for spirits licenses…
FALSE: If this measure passes, the number of liquor stores in Washington will skyrocket to at least 4-times the current number—almost immediately. That’s irresponsible and dangerous. And there is a major loophole in the measure that would allow convenience stores and gas stations to carry liquor. According to I-1183, 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. This is especially problematic because “trade area” is an undefined term—neither the state, the Liquor Control Board, nor the initiative itself explicitly defines what precisely constitutes a “trade area.”
Businesses around Washington are united in getting the state out of the liquor business…
FALSE: This initiative was drafted by corporate stores for corporate profits. Those profits would be so great, that one corporation has broken records by spending tens of millions of dollars in an attempt to buy this election and the passage of I-1183. This measure gives an unfair monopoly to big box stores at the expense of small businesses and workers. That is why small grocers, businesses, breweries, wineries and workers are united against this measure. I-1183 will immediately eliminate over 1,000 jobs at a time when we can least afford it and it will put many local entrepreneurs out of business.
This measure eliminates a level playing field and lines the pockets of out-of-state corporate big box stores at the expense of our local economy.
It’s a bad deal that we simply can’t afford.
Say No… Again. Reject I-1183!
