Good evening from Seattle!
Nearly all the counties that have reported election results so far show a fairly lopsided outcome on Costco’s Initiative 1183, which aims to deregulate and privatize the state’s liquor system.
As of 8:50 PM, the yes vote stood at 59.74%, while the no vote stood at 40.26%.
The results look fairly decisive. At this point, it’s safe to say that Costco has just successfully purchased an election, thanks to a hefty $22.5 million plus war chest.
At present, I‑1183 is only failing in Asotin, Cowlitz, Garfield, and Wahkiakum counties, which are all fairly rural. Protect Our Communities’ message appears to have resonated there, but unfortunately it hasn’t resonated anywhere else.
Whether I‑1183 actually becomes part of the Revised Code of Washington is another matter. The initiative, which isn’t very well written, may end up being challenged in court prior to the first week in December, when initiatives go into effect.
This is absolutely pathetic, and a foreshadowing for Seattle’s bleak political future.
Many kids are going to die because of this initiative.
The initiative is sound. To say someone bought an election is ludicrous. People voted based on the facts.
The no side used scare tactics and blatant lies. Clearly the voters of Washington State were smart enough to make their own conclusions.
There will be no court battles. There is nothing to dispute.
This is democracy at its finest.
Editor’s note: This commenter’s screen name was chosen by NPI.
Please.
It was either Costco buying the election… or the Wine and Spirits Wholesalers of America, who bankrolled the entire NO campaign.
The same WSWA who invited Sarah Palin as a keynote speaker to their convention. These guys didn’t care about safety, they cared about keeping outdated state liquor monopolies in business so they could charge more for distribution. They outlied Costco 3 to 1 every step of the campaign.
The reality is here that two businesses tried to buy this election, so kudos to Washington for actually making the decision that benefits the consumer.
Costco didn’t ‘buy’ my vote. The government has NO business in ANY business, with few exceptions. Easy decision.
It’s sad that Costco gambled what was a reputation for being a good corporate citizen, to increase it’s bottom line.
So when an election doesn’t go your way it’s because the voters were too stupid to make their own decision on the merits of the initiative.
Of course, we weren’t too stupid to reject 1125, which was bought and paid for by the largest developer on the Eastside.
I voted on the merits of 1183 — getting the state out of a business it has no reason to be in — regardless of who poured money into it. (And by the way, the opponents spent almost as much with their misleading, save-the-children ads. But somehow people saw through those, too.)
I believe there were two questions to be considered before the elections, and still are.
1. Should private stores be granted liquor sales permits?
2. Should voters allow big corporate interests to high jack our citizens initiative process?
For me the second question is the most important, and trumps the first. Over the past couple of decades OUR initiative process has become a tool for those with the deepest pockets to write legislation tailored to their own selfish interests(e.g. the 10,000 square foot clause in I 1183). My question is how can we take it back? I for one will never sign an initiative unless the signature gatherer is a volunteer.
My family and I voted yes on I‑1183. I think that the state should not be only one to sell hard liquor. That’s what you call a monopoly.
Although I understand the public’s desire to get the state out of the liquor business, I‑1183 unfairly favors the big corporate stores. 1183 imposes a 10% tax on distributors that a company like Costco can avoid by buying direct from a distiller. By the way, we will be the only state that allows that. If the distributors fail to collect $150 million in taxes by March 2013, and they will be way short, they have to make up the difference. Effectively, that keeps competition out of this state until 2013. Is that fair?
I belong to the First Church of the Living Bible. Our pastor the Reverend Roland Kingman has said Jesus would have voted for 1183 as wine for communion would have been much cheaper. We have a very tight church budget. May the Lord be with us.