Soda pop sellers, liquor distributors and discount retailers are pouring millions of dollars into Washington to convince you how to vote on a slew of statewide ballot measures.
Some $30 million so far – the majority from out of state – has flooded the coffers of campaigns for or against a wide array of initiatives to the people, a process in Washington that lets voters enact laws they feel their legislators won’t.
While that right was initially given to the public in 1914 as a way to counterbalance the influence of powerful interests on the Legislature, this year’s campaign contributions illustrate how it has increasingly become the province of special interests, big business and unions.
“The old purpose of the (initiative) process is being subverted,” Blaine Gavin, professor of political science at Gonzaga University, said. “Interest groups recognize there’s another way to make law, and big powerful interests know how to conduct good advertising campaigns.”
To read more, go inside the blog…
Or check the list of the Top 25 contributors to all initiative campaigns, and the Top 10 Spokane area donors in the post below.
Supporters of Initiative 1107 – which would repeal temporary taxes on
bottled water, candy, soda and some processed foods – was sometimes
described as a way to help the mom and pop convenience stores and local
grocers facing new taxes. But the campaign to sell it to voters is being
underwritten by the American Beverage Association based in Washington,
D.C. The national group that represents soda bottlers has so far
contributed some $14.3 million – more than 99 percent of all money
raised by Stop the Food and Beverage Tax Hikes, the campaign for I-1107.
The soda industry has become aggressive in fighting any new tax around
the country as legislatures and Congress looks for new sources of money
to balance budgets, Todd Donovan, political science professor at Western
Washington University, said. “They’ve got a target on their backs
because you can only tax cigarettes so much before people stop buying
Fighting to defeat I-1107, and thus keep the tax on carbonated beverages
as well as the other “non-essential” consumer items on the books, are
groups that stood to lose if the taxes hadn’t been enacted. State
workers unions, who could face more layoffs, wage cuts or both if the
taxes are repealed, are among the biggest donors to the no campaign,
with the Washington Federation of State Employees giving $70,000 to
Protect Our Economic Future and the Service Employees International
Union giving $41,000.
As Washington voters decide whether to eliminate the state’s
post-Prohibition system of selling liquor, they’ll be courted by
competing groups representing corporate and union interests. Costco, a
Washington-based discount retailer, spent nearly $1.2 million on I-1100
which would essentially let it set up its own liquor distribution
system. Two liquor distributors, Young’s Market Co. of Los Angeles and
Odom Southern Holdings of Bellevue, essentially matched Costco in
backing I-1105, which drops the state out of the retail liquor business
but requires distributors get between the makers and the retailers.
Now the National Beer Wholesalers Association and the Beer Institute
have joined with state beer and wine wholesalers to defeat both measures
to sell liquor much in retail stores, much the way beer and wine are
sold. Craig Purser of the wholesalers association described the two
initiatives as “deregulation disguised as privatization.” He said the
state’s liquor laws do need changing, but the Legislature should do it
because “these efforts go too far.”
Beer and wine distributors are joined in a campaign committee called
Protect Our Communities by the United Food and Commercial Workers, which
represents workers at the state stores.
The Save Our Jobs committee is not connected to any of those efforts,
nor is it supported by unions. Instead, it’s the campaign to pass
Initiative 1082, which would open the state’s unemployment compensation
system to private insurance companies. Its main donors are the Building
Industry Association of Washington, Liberty Mutual Insurance and Big I, a
consortium of the state’s independent insurers. BIAW and the insurance
industry, who are among the heaviest hitters in Olympia, are matched
against some other big guns, the trial lawyers and unions who are
backing the No on I-1082 committee.
The proposal to place an income tax on “high earners” – individuals
making more than $200,000 or couples making twice that – has heavy
support from state employees and service employees. It also pits some of
Washington’s wealthier individuals against each other. Bill Gates Sr., a
prominent attorney who is the chief proponent of the measure and father
of the Microsoft founder, has given $500,000 to the yes campaign. John
Nordstrom, of the retail chain, and John Stanton, who made his fortune
in cellular phones, have given to Defeat 1098, as has Spokane’s Cowles
Company, the parent company of The Spokesman-Review.
Spending on I-1107 is already approaching the record for a statewide
initiative, and there are still two months left in the campaign. How
high the spending will go is anyone’s guess. Unlike candidate races,
Donovan, the WWU professor noted, initiative campaigns have no limits on
the size of contributions.