Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

I-1183: Privatization poses no threat to safety

Letter by Tim McCreary, Lacey on Oct. 18, 2011 at 10:27 am with 5 Comments »
October 18, 2011 12:19 pm

After reading numerous studies about the privatization of alcohol sales vs. state control, the data suggest public safety is better served by privatization.

Despite the Canadian findings of an increase in alcohol-related fatalities due to alcohol privatization, American researchers found numerous problems with the Canadian research. For example, the demographics of the newly privatized stores were not considered.

The Commonwealth Foundation’s study for the Pennsylvania Senate debate showed an actual increase in alcohol-related fatalities among those states with the greatest control over alcohol sales. One possible explanation for this is that those states with the greatest controls over liquor sales encourage drinkers to drive to bars or restaurants more frequently.

The Commonwealth Foundation study also showed that there is “no relationship between alcohol control and underage drinking,” and “among the 10 states with the lowest rates of underage drinking, six states are license states.”

Alcohol-related highway fatalities have decreased dramatically in most of world’s developed countries since the 1980s. Increased enforcement stood out as a significant variable that directly affected the level of drinking and driving in those countries.

In short, the studies show that state control of alcohol sales decreases public safety and increases fatalities. I believe that the state of Washington would best serve the public’s interest by privatizing liquor sales and increasing investment in drug and alcohol education programs, law enforcement and liquor sales regulation. I vote yes on I-1183.

Leave a comment Comments → 5
  1. I’m with you, Tim.

    This isn’t about safety…other than the safety of that pile of profits that goes into the state revenue budget to pay for services badly needed by citizens.

    There is NO REASON to fix what isn’t broken.

  2. the3rdpigshouse says:

    Here we go again with the safety of the “children” B.S. mantra by the socialist democrats and their monopolist supporters!!

  3. taxedenoughintacoma says:

    What is broke is WA state itself. We can’t affort to spend 100 million $$$ to pay state employees to sell drugs. This old system must end and use that money on education and public safety which should be our priorty.

    We must reduce the size and number of state employees and their unions.

  4. taxedenoughintacoma says:

    The positives of this measure so far outweigh the negatives that not to pass it really does insure that we’re just going to see it again and again until we finally wise up. We’ve all seen how clumsy and balky Olympia is and how little common sense is employed in addressing our problems. Do we really want to give BIG jobs – like the running, staffing, brokering, distribution, AND enforcement of liquor in Washington – to people who perform their basic tasks this badly? Enforcement is a big enough job. Let’s let the state do what states do best: make laws and see that we abide by them.

  5. “What is broke is WA state itself. We can’t affort to spend 100 million $$$ to pay state employees to sell drugs.”

    Broke….but….we’ll give away the profits……Brilliant.

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0