Costco has dumped a startling $22.5 million into the ballot proposal that would open liquor sales in Washington to big retailers, and the new record for donations to a single ballot campaign is getting some attention.
Foes of Initiative 1183 are using the big donations to say Costco is trying to buy the election. But the I-1183 opposition has raised a whopping $11.7 million, most of it from national and state alcohol wholesalers.
Meanwhile, national distillers are running independent ads that say the measure is flawed and might not be good for consumers.
“When we hit $30 million in a place like Washington, this is off the charts,” said Todd Donovan, a political science professor at Western Washington University who has written books about the initiative process. “We’re into what would be an expensive initiative in California.”
Joel Benoliel, a senior vice president with Issaquah-based Costco, said the company contributed the last $8.9 million Monday – the deadline for contributions larger than $5,000 – as a precaution.
Benoliel said the company wants the money to be there if the I-1183 campaign must head off late ads from the opposition; he said that happened to a Costco-backed liquor measure last year.
“We are very hopeful that it does not become necessary to spend that amount of money. Our shareholders should understand we expect to get a good share of that refunded,” Benoliel said.
Alex Fryer of the opposition’s Protect Washington Communities said more contributions were to be reported by his side to the state Public Disclosure Commission by Saturday’s deadline. But he expected them to be less than $500,000.
Ballots went out to voters last week for Washington’s Nov. 8 election, and the airwaves have been saturated with political ads in what ordinarily would be a quiet, off-year election.
Two other initiatives are on the ballot: I-1125 deals with tolls, and I-1163 involves home care workers’ training. Each of the three measures got on the ballot thanks to heavy donations from a single source that could pay signature gatherers. But the liquor measure has the biggest war chests.
Donovan, the professor, wasn’t sure I-1183 portends a surge in spending for future ballot measures.
“The most money on these things tends to be when you get two wealthy economic interests squaring off. It reminds me of the trial lawyers and the insurance industry” in 2005, Donovan said, referring to spending on a pair of initiatives that sought to address medical liability. “It’s something people (lawmakers) in Olympia don’t want to touch.”
The heavy outlay by well-heeled groups with vested interest in the measure is also reminiscent of the $16 million spent by the soda pop industry last year to repeal a tax on soft drinks.
Shawn Newman, Washington state director for the Los Angeles-based Initiative & Referendum Institute, said it is symptomatic of money in politics everywhere – and the futility in trying to limit it.
“Given the stakes and the economic interests, and looking at California, we are going to see more of this spending,” Newman said. “There is this myth that this (initiative and referendum) process was intended to be purely grass-roots and not involving consultants and the campaign apparatus."
More spending is in the offing for I-1183.
The Distilled Spirits Council of the United States launched a newspaper and online ad campaign Thursday. The council claimed its “education” effort, which included a half-page ad in The Olympian, was neutral on privatization.
But the council also warned that I-1183 is “flawed” and “may not be in your best interest as a customer.” The ad said the measure creates an extra layer of middle-men, limits the ability of small businesses to participate, reduces product choices and might increase prices.
The Washington, D.C.-based group filed paperwork Friday to say it had spent $29,850 so far. Spokesman Ben Jenkins declined to say how much more it might spend, but he wrote in an email that “we may run TV and radio between now and Election Day.”
Lori Anderson of the state Public Disclosure Commission said that as a group making independent expenditures, the council has to report its spending only within 24 hours of voters seeing the messages. If it is spending only money it had previously accumulated – and did not make fundraising appeals – it does not have to register as a political committee and its funds are not subject to the $5,000 limit on contributions during the campaign’s final three weeks.
“They can spend whatever they want,” Anderson said.
What is not clear is whether the multimillion-dollar crossfire of ad messages will sway the outcome of this years-long fight over whether to end Washington state government’s control and operation of liquor sales and distribution.
“I wouldn’t overstate the effect. I’ve always thought the spending is more effective on the no side,” Donovan said, acknowledging that some experts argue ads help drive the vote.
Even Costco’s leaders are a bit dismayed by the spending and claim they never intended to go this far.
“We are extremely troubled by the fact that these things have gotten so expensive. It may seem odd for the company that wrote the check to say that, but we are in it” to win, Benoliel said.
JOIN THE DISCUSSION | Register here
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. A thorough explanation of rules of conduct can be found in our Terms of Service. If you have any questions, including why your comment may not be showing immediately after you submit it, be sure to visit the commenting FAQ.