Posted by MinusTwenty at 8/28/08 8:19 a.m.

The WSLCB needs to die. This state has ridiculous liquor laws.

Posted by animimi at 8/28/08 8:41 a.m.

Unfortunately, the WSLCB will not die. It brings in too much revenue for the state.

Also, wine tastings at the grocery store are a weird idea. For example, the onus is on the vendor to check ID and make sure you don't get "overserved". And if you want to sample a variety of wines they may have available? Oops! Too bad. However, it could be good for the stores because it might loosen up a few wallets and not just for purchasing wine...

Posted by unregistered user at 8/28/08 8:47 a.m.

Why, in such a liberal state, do we have such restrictive, prudish liquor laws? Not to mention it's a monopoly!

Posted by fritzrl at 8/28/08 9:17 a.m.

"Why, in such a liberal state, do we have such restrictive, prudish liquor laws?"

It used to be worse! When I lived in Seattle the first time in the late 1970's, restrictions on pubs and bars were bordering on bizarre. For example, an area where people were drinking alcohol (the actual bar area of a restaurant, for example) could not be visible either from the street or from the non-drinking areas of the business. I recall a lot of painted-over exterior windows then. There was also a regulation about the proportion of business revenue from food sales vs from liquor sales -- unless a restaurant or pub earned x% of income from food, it couldn't earn anything from alcohol. That provision may even still be around.

I was shocked when I returned to Seattle in '91 that one could actually see the interior of a pub/bar from the sidewalk -- no more painted windows!

And bear in mind: Washington as a whole is *not* a liberal state. Regardless, I think the liquor control board is a net money-earner for the state, so any considerations of prudery are probably irrelevant.

Posted by unregistered user at 8/28/08 9:38 a.m.

ok so in a city where pot is virtually legal i can only drink 4 ozs. of wine at a tasting? yes i know the state's silly booze laws are loosening, but this is nutso.

Posted by JustRoss at 8/28/08 9:58 a.m.

Posted by animimi at 8/28/08 8:41 a.m.

Unfortunately, the WSLCB will not die. It brings in too much revenue for the state.

The sad thing is, the state doesn't realize it could rake in twice as much revenue from the WSLCB if it had half as much regulation. The state could still tax the bejesus out of liquor, beer, and wine, but there is no need for the state to have deal with the overhead of actually operating all the retail locations for liquor, distributing liquor to bars and restaurants, paying buyers to select and purchase liquor from distilleries and distributors, and warehousing the purchases.

Cut the staff down the tax enforcers/inspectors, let private owners operate liquor stores and let them decide what gets stocked and sold, and at what prices, as long as the tax man gets his cut. Then maybe you could find a decent bottle scotch in this state without having to do a special order.

Posted by blackhook at 8/28/08 1:33 p.m.

The real problem with allowing more alcohol is the kamikaze cart pushers.

No doubt we would see a dramatic increase in PASCUI (Pushing A Shopping Cart Under the Influence) violations.

Posted by unregistered user at 8/28/08 2:58 p.m.

Its not the WSLCB, ya dummies. It is the Governor: Christine Gregoire (D)! Ya see, she created these commisioners of beer and commisioners of wine. They are the pundits, the secret lobbyists for the wine and beer business. But you were smart enough to follow the money trail? Good for you! And as far as the social prudes that drag down the good name of social drinking, drugs and sex somehow missed the rock and roll revolution and are stuck in Mr Rogers sweater closet trying on dog collars or playing painfully with egg beaters. (Either the device or the liquid product.) But fear not. You ALL make me sick so get out of my beer wine smoke and farts thank you please. Now, go p*ss off.

Posted by unregistered user at 8/28/08 3:04 p.m.

Something to think about.

Wine samplers may wander all over the store with the plastic cup in hand, but were you aware that beer samplers must be "caged" in a area where the beer must be consumed before they leave that area of the store.
Yet, isn't wine's (ABV)or (ABW) higher alcohol than the beer? Hmmm wine=republican beer=democrat weed=The good and honest chosen people who will save earth.
And there you have it folks! (Thanks Iman)

Posted by yeomalt at 8/30/08 4:50 p.m.

I agree with JustRoss. 49 other states have figured out how to deal with the same situation. Why not pick one of the most efficient methods and go with that?

The government version of retail management in Washington State prevents us from buying a bottle of booze at Safeway, Costco, Tom's liquor, etc. Most State operated stores are closed on Sundays and holidays- some feature a 7 PM closing time on Saturdays. Tell Mr major retailer that he must shut down at 7PM on a Saturday- great way to create jobs, bring in revenue, jump start the economy. etc.

And what's up with not being able to buy a bottle on solemn holidays like July 4th, New years, Labor Day, Columbus Day, etc?

As it stands now- if you are traveling to an unfamiliar part of the state you may have to stop and ask for directions to the liquor store, because it isn't near where you are doing your basic shopping.

One stop shopping would be more green friendly.

Some states treat alcohol like just another adult retail product, with the understanding that in many cases alcohol abuse is already illegal. It is 2008 after-all.