The Garfield Administration’s idea for rekindling old rivalries and intensifying new ones is based around the belief that it will boost school spirit. It’s possible that more Garfield students will do well in school knowing that they are five times smarter than their counterparts at Rainer Beach, and more students will score higher on their SATs just for the satisfaction of knowing that a fellow teenager from Roosevelt scored less. Garfield Administrator and co-founder Ronald Peert is confident that creating this board will bring great results to the school, financially and morally. “I know that if students are taught to achieve based on the fact that they don’t want to look like a cluck when compared to a Roosevelt student, they will achieve greatness. We can expect to see higher graduation rates and probably more prestigious college acceptance.”

The Rivalry Board has formed a “top three” list of our nemeses: Franklin, Rainier Beach, and Roosevelt. Academic groups, clubs, or sports at Garfield will be rewarded by the board if they outperform our most hated adversaries. The higher our adversary is on the list, then the higher the reward in funding. Peert is sure that this will get clubs, sports, and even club sports at Garfield to perform to their highest potential. Besides the pride earned from beating our contenders, financial gains are the second part of the goal behind the Rivalry Board.

Because of Seattle School budget shortfalls that are fast approaching, money from any source is helpful. Because one of the largest sources of income for the school is the sale of tickets at sporting events, the idea of enhancing pre-existing rivalries seemed to fit. If there are more intense, heated games and an increased potential for brawls, attendance for Garfield sports would increase by 50 percent in the next two years after the Rivalry Board is established, according to the data from the board’s findings.

“We know that the students do want to see a fight at a game, so why not give them what they want? It’ll probably increase the popularity of the event, and that means more ticket prices” says police officer Alonzo Harris, who will supervise sports events against rival teams. The idea for allowing fights at games definitely has a future, as fervor for a rematch against Redmond is high and another bench clearing brawl has the potential to raise the spirits of the Bulldogs. Measures are being made to reinstate Franklin as well as Rainier Beach in our division.

The Administration is taking steps to create more tension and contest between Garfield and others with the introduction of new programs. A new boxing class will be added next year, and the dance team will begin to train in a “battle-style” setting for dance-offs. Teachers will be allowed to reward extra credit points if their students surpass other schools in standardized test scores.

Franklin has already put together its equivalent of our rivalry board (Franklin Fighters Committee), for the same reasons. Already, it seems to have worked, as student morale has skyrocketed. Student Jaylebirduh Jaackson is confident that Franklin will win over its opponents. “Your average Bulldog is a real Pussy(cat). They ain’t got [nothin’] on us.” Fightin’ words, indeed, Jaackson.

The Rivalry Board existence is not for sure, as aforementioned budget cuts loom ahead, threatening programs at Garfield. With this profit, the board would fund programs in danger of being cut. The goal, veiled by the want to increase school spirit and crush our competitors, is to help these struggling programs. If the board is successful, then the danger of beloved programs being cut could be diminished, and the Bulldogs would probably still destroy the Quakers, the Vikings, and the Roughriders. Win Win.

The general philosophy behind collective punishment is that by making everyone pay for the faults of one person, everyone will be brought together.

I’ll note that this system works in the military, where you are responsible for your fellow soldier and he is responsible for you—and on a sports team, which is meant to be unified. A team is a team, and it helps the players keep each other in line.

Collective punishment isn’t appropriate for school use. Its unfairness outweighs the benefits of the method. It’s simply not right for people to suffer consequences because of what a handful of people did.

A couple weeks ago, I had to use the restroom, but I couldn’t because all of the men’s bathrooms were closed, supposedly “due to student misuse.” Because a few students thought it would be cool or funny to tag the bathroom, no boys were allowed to use the bathrooms.

Not all of the boys are responsible. We cannot be responsible for all of the actions of our peers, especially to such an extent. I have no idea how I’m supposed to prevent people from writing in the bathrooms unless I’m always on patrol.

I don’t know who out of the 1,800 students at our school tagged the bathrooms, and I have no way of finding out. It seems like the only way to avoid that situation is  to be angry at each other when we don’t know who is responsible.

Collective punishment works on the field, but that’s where it should stay, literally.

When our school faced serious allegations from the Washington Interscholastic Activities Association, all of Garfield’s sports were threatened to be put on probation. Until recently, the football team was banned from playing in post-season games until 2012. Thankfully, neither of the penalties stuck. Still, it shows that the deeds of some led to the chastisement of many who were not affiliated.

I applaud the school’s intentions—“A” for effort. Sometimes, discipline should not come from authority, but from the offender’s peers. If a teacher gives me a stern warning, I’m still probably going to disobey because I don’t feel bad about my actions. Even if a teacher truly explains why it’s a bad thing for me to do, it is still very possible that I will disregard her authority.

Now, imagine that my friends are the ones that talk to me. I’ll probably stop.

I will feel guilty, and guilt leads to better actions in the future. Psychologists call this “withdrawal motivation”. Guilt also generates a positive experience that encourages moral behavior along the standards of one’s community, known as “approach motivation”.

When a student breaks a rule and the teacher penalizes them, the student will probably make sure that next time the teacher isn’t looking. If the student feels guilty, however, then there’s a better chance of redemption.

Solving a lot of the school’s problems will come from within the student body, with students working together and listening to one another.

We don’t have to be responsible for each other’s actions because that is nearly impossible.

If we cannot see this future, then I doubt our superiors can either. And if that follows, then so will the unfair policies of facing punishments because some kid you haven’t even heard of broke the rules.

Instructional Assistants, or IAs, work with 1st generation bilingual students. These students are enrolled in some remidial classes, and in some regular ones. With this group of students, IAs are the most important teachers at Garfield, because they basically have to do everything. “We get involved with the students 100 percent because we know the culture,” says Mrs. Larson, a Spanish IA.

Instructional Assistants help bilingual students adjust to Garfield classes and deal with any culture shock they might experience. IAs serve as a medium between the student, the student’s parents, and the administration.

There are six IAs who separately cover Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese, Somali, and Eritrian, but different IAs may speak more than one of these languages. For example, Mr. Gonfa, from Ethiopia, speaks Amharic (Ethiopia’s official language, along with Oromo), Swahili, and English.

At Garfield, there are 170 students and only six IAs, four of whom work half-time. IAs are required to be available before school, at lunch, and after school for tutoring. But, with the new schedule, their lunchtimes are different, and lunch is when most ELD students get help. Despite the obstacles their involvement is admirable. During first period, Mr. Gonfa is responsible for about 40 students who have 25 different classes.

Sometimes 2nd generation students who are fluent in English have parents who aren’t. IAs help explain school policies to the parents, and the parents feel more comfortable as the IAs know both the language and the culture. IAs are there for translation and more importantly comfort.

Bilingual students took the Washington Language Proficiency Test (WLPT) on February 16, something that IAs have been helping prepare for. The Oral Language Proficiency Exam (OLPT), the High School Proficiency Exam (HSPE), and Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) are other tests they take. The versatility needed for the job is also something to note; IAs also serve as counselors to the bilingual students. Emotional problems are brought to IAs, with students sometimes confiding more trust in them then their parents.  Besides the fact that only ELD students use IAs, they seem to be barely known, let alone recognized. It seems that there is a disconnection between the “mainstream” student body and the bilingual program. Yet, it was not always that way, Mr. Gonfa recalls, with events like Cultural Talent Shows.

“When they do that kind of stuff, and they bring different kinds of cultures around the world, that is when the mainstream student like you can discover that ‘oh! These groups of students are also here.”

On the internet, we talk to each other more as much as we do at school, but the idea of safety has become an afterthought. As more and more of communications between peers go online, the talk and the comments becomes less and less like actual interaction. People say or do things online that they would never have the courage to face to face.

Tyler Clementi was a promising musician and 18-year-old student at Rutgers University when a fellow student uploaded a video of him having relations with another man onto the internet for all member of the dorm to see. Tyler responded by making a post of Facebook saying “Jumping off the gw bridge sorry.”

The reason behind his suicide was common; he was driven to death by bullying. The hatred and insults that cause cases like Tyler’s are known as Cyberbullying. It is visible in texts, emails, or any other interaction involving the internet or electronic means. Cyberbullying is different than bullying in that there is no escape from the taunting, with the use of personal communication, the harassment can be 24/7. As Cyberbullying becomes more evident, it’s unclear whether it’s just an extension of bullying, or something different.

In November, Garfield Club S.A.V.E. (Students Against Violence Everywhere) and C.O.R.E. (Congress of Racial Equality, the leader of Cultural Relations retreats) hosted a discussion-based meeting on the subject on bullying. Students voiced their views on what is and is not bullying. The topic slowly moved towards the grade hierarchy at our school.

For long it’s been known that seniors are at the top and freshmen the bottom, but this attitude was explored. Some students argued that this treatment was part of growing up and was something that is a rite of passage along with respecting one’s elders. Other disagreed, claiming that the only elders they respected were those that respected them.

Even seniors questioned the hierarchy and its merits; bulling was not something that had to be endured, it had to be stopped. The topic of froshing or hazing did not surface with the topic of bulling, only the treatment of our peers, specifically underclassmen. It would be safe to assume that few thought froshing was akin to bullying.

That night, S.A.V.E. hosted a meeting with Principal Ted Howard, Officer Radford, family counselor Harry Brown, and Stefanie M. Thomas, a victim advocate for Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force for the Seattle Police Department. The meeting started out with Stefanie Thomas talking about the current misuse of social networking sites by teens, with startling facts. She says 25% of kids have been victim to cyberbullying. The number could be higher, however, because this includes only those victims that have reported the crime.

When a cyberbullying case is turned over to the police, the precinct gets to decide whether to handle it or not. At Garfield, it’s up to Officer Benny. If they choose not to handle it, they pass it to the ICAC Task Force, which will deal with it and file it under their definition. ICAC may then pass it on to the King County Prosecutor, which could send it to the Juvenile Court. However, at this stage it may not be filed as the actual RCW of “Cyberstalking” and will not reach that level of discipline. The violation is a gross misdemeanor, so the consequences can range from community service to serious juvenile, so the consequences can range from community service to serious juvenile penalties. If one is 18, it can lead to up to a year in jail.

While the meeting started with this topic, the conversation slowly shifted to froshing and hazing, with Office Radford insisting that by the new Purple and White day they would have a police presence to combat it. It became clear what the adults though; froshing was the equivalent of bullying. Some member of S.A.V.E., even the freshmen in the group argued against this. Froshing was not bullying, but an initiation that could be fun, if not taken it too far. By the end of the meeting there was a suggested agreement: to avoid any terrible abuse and to change the accepted treatment, cooperation must come from the students. It must be a school-wide change in attitude, and the only way the students would change would be from hearing each other, not the adults.

The idea of bullying as a rite of passage is one that has slowly begun to change. Harry Brown, the counselor at the S.A.V.E. meeting, thinks that “it’s become a health issue.” Brown attended a conference downtown held by the International Bullying Prevention Association (IBPA).

“People are seeing the long term effect, the incredible number of people who are bullied or bullies that end up in prison, the impact it has on other kids learning,” says Brown.

In a Norwegian study by prominent bullying expert Dan Olweus, sixty percent of boys who were bullied in middle school had a criminal conviction by age 24. Olweus created the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program. It has been translated into fifteen languages and implemented into thousands of schools. Celia Arriaga is the Seattle School District’s Olweus certified trainer.

Patti Agatston, a board member for the IBPA, relates bullying to any other type of abuse. “We wouldn’t tell a child to just ‘suck it up’ if they are being beaten or emotionally abused by an adult, why should we say that when it is a peer?”

Handling of bullies is something that is also undergoing change. Stan Davis, author of the book Where Everyone Belongs: Practical Strategies to Reduce Bullying, believes that ignoring the bully or telling the bully how you feel are the wrong steps to resolution. Davis helped produce a survey, the Youth Voice Project, researching peer mistreatment. From the study, 42% of bullied students reported it, and in 34% of the cases things got better, while in 29% things got worse.

Davis’ work insists that teachers respect young people’s autonomy and accept the fact that if they try to make young people change no good will come of it. Young people should feel that they belong, and learn the cause and effect of their actions.

At Garfield, it’s common to hear stories about close run-ins with the boys in blue. With parties that get broken up and transactions that go bad, the story of “the cop let us go” is often told. It seems that many more people have almost gotten an MIP than have actually been charged with one.

An MIP is a “gross misdemeanor,” punishable by up to a maximum of 1 year in jail and a $5,000 fine. It’s unlawful for a person under 21 to possess, acquire, or consume liquor, according to our state’s legislature. Possession of illegal drugs also falls under this category, and it is on your juvenile record and is sealed at the age of 18.

In Washington State, what constitutes an MIP is quite broad. Merely exhibiting the effects of alcohol—stumbling or having alcohol on your breath—can lead to a breathalyzer test. Having or even being in close proximity to a container that has liquor or had liquor in it makes one eligible. Most MIPs result in a fine, but a court date can be assigned.

The Department of Licensing may revoke your license, for one year or until your 17th birthday if it’s your first offense, or for two years or until your 18th birthday if it’s your second offense. In either case, the longer suspension is chosen. The DOL also sends out a letter explaining the revocation, including a form for appeals. On your driving record, it only says that your license has been revoked.

Various Garfield students have escaped such situations and dodged the dreaded MIP charge. Garfield student Martha* was all dressed up and ready to party on Halloween weekend while she was visiting a college friend in Oregon. Unbeknownst to her, there were many cops on duty. As she and her college friend walked out of the dorm, Martha had a plastic bottle filled with the devil-drink, Four Loko. She thought that since everyone else had alcohol, hers wouldn’t be a problem, but she had no place to hide it when five bike police circled around her and her friend. One cop asked what the liquid was, and, dissatisfied with Martha’s obvious lie, he took the bottle, smelled it, and dumped it out on the ground. Martha received a telling-off from the cop and many questions while two additional patrol cars arrived. The officers got her mom’s number and called her. Martha recalls the cops saying to her mom, “You have two options; we can take her to Juvy, or she can go back to her friends, and cannot go out tonight. You guys need to send her home first thing in the morning.” The less severe choice was taken, but not without the police recording her name, height, and weight, and putting her in the database. They warned her that if they saw her again she would be fined $400 and taken into Juvenile Detention.

“They said the only reason I didn’t get an MIP is because I actually gave them a real number and had them talk to my parents,” says Martha.

Another Garfield student, Timothy*, was using an illicit substance to enhance his experience at a Bumbershoot concert. From what seemed to him like out of nowhere, a security guard confronted him and his friends. Timothy was taken to a corner of the concert and the security guard yelled at him and took his plants.

“He threatened to throw me in jail and I basically just asked him not to,” says Timothy. Again, a Garfield student emerges with a clean criminal record. Is this luck, or do the police care?

They do, according to Garfield student Syebud*. He and his friend were hanging out in a parking lot when officers arrived, apparently on patrol. They asked him if he had been drinking, which he denied. When the cops searched their backpacks, Syebud’s bottle of vodka was found, and into the back of the police car he went.

After passing various sobriety tests, Syebud was informed that he was being charged with an MIP. His father came and retrieved him at the station.

It’s very likely that Syebud will go to court.

It may seem to police that it’s just not worth giving out an MIP in a party situation or in general, but it’s not worth it to minors to imagine it will always be okay. One cannot afford the assumption that he or she won’t get caught; it’s easy to feel too comfortable. You don’t have to be buzzed to be busted.

*Name has been changed.

(Responses have been edited for clarity.)

Jacob Kennelly: Where are you from? What’s your background?

Lando Wynter: Actually, my dad is from Bogotá, Columbia. My mom is from Bahila, Salvador (Brazil), and I was raised for a time in both countries, but I spent most of my childhood in Bahila. I came to the States in the mid seventies. I went to Jack Yates High School in Texas, and graduated from University of Houston in ’82. From there I went into the Navy, with a commission; I had ROTC scholarship, and I played some ball at University of Houston. After that I joined the Navy and spent 15 years there.

JK: What are your previous jobs or training?

LW: Military, 15 years in the Navy, commission; released in ’97 with rank of lieutenant commander and started doing police work for the King County, and I did that until 2004.

JK: What brought you to Garfield High School?

LW: Well, I think it was the choice of schools I wanted to work with because of the curriculum, the students, and the area. Garfield is a pretty good school in my opinion. I’m happy to be here.

JK: What do you do during a typical day at Garfield High School?

LW: A typical day at Garfield involves patrolling the halls, trying to secure them to a point, trying to monitor the commoners and making sure there are no problems as far as drugs or any other stuff going on.

JK: What’s the weirdest thing you’ve seen on the cameras at Garfield?

LW: Drug transactions. On several occasions I’ve seen one kid pick up the “stuff” and deliver it to another student for purchase or distribution if you want to call it that.

JK: What’s the worst thing you’ve seen or had to deal with at GHS thus far?

LW: That would be seeing kids use alcohol or drugsit’s not as much of a problem here as it is at other schools, but it’s here. To actually see it during this time of day is kind of surprising.

JK: What are some changes you want to implement at Garfield High School?

LW: A safe environment, which is what I think is in place right now. I think Garfield is a great opportunity for that; kids are well adjusted, and it’s a very good school academically. I’d like to see more integration socially  amongst  the kids, black and white. There are a lot of cliques; I’d like to see students open up more, despite cultural differences, and come together more. I’d like to see more of a cultural thing come together, as far as African kids getting more of an understanding of their place. Everyone seems to want to be in a box instead of that, I want to see more interaction between students.

JK: How much can you bench-press?

LW: At this point, I can probably bench about 550 pounds. That’s the best I’ve done in the last three years. At one point I could do 580, but that was a few years ago. I can regularly do 550 for three reps.

JK: What is your favorite Youtube video?

LW: (Takes a long moment to think about it)…It was in Europe and they did a concert on TV…

JK: Was it the

“We Are The World” Song?

LW: Yeah, it’s the “We are the world” song. They made it in Europe and broadcasted it over the Internet.

Last year, at our anti-bullying assembly, Garfield students were handed a purple and white rubber bracelet with the words “Be the Change” inscribed.

The guest speaker’s basic philosophy was “If you’re not changing anything, you’re doing nothing!”

Political action is never this simple.

Why is the “you’re with us or you’re against us” attitude used in youth getting involved in change? Surely there are those amongst us who are content with the way things are, so where is their motivational speaker? The new ideas brought down upon our generation are all about bringing change and starting something—basically, saving the world. Bono, the singer of U2, loves to talk about how our generation is going to end poverty and disease, and be the ones that history remembers. That’s great—he’s one in a long line of adults telling me that I need to get up and change stuff, be a part of something, be more conscious, and impact the world.

Since when does my age demographic have to start paying off the debts of previous generations? We’re now responsible for the trash, the fossil fuels, and the unhealthy diets that our parents created.

If we want to fix these problems, all living generations need to be involved. The task is daunting and impossible to complete with just the youth of America leading the way. There’s too much naïveté, and we cannot afford to rely on only one age group. It’s unfair  and unrealistic for older generations to turn their backs and say “It’s up to you guys!”

Those who actually generated the problems must take part in fixing them, for they have a greater responsibility to right what they have wronged. It’s like if I broke a dish and told my baby cousin to fix it while I proudly smiled and watched while saying “You’ve got it! It’s all up to you!”

Many teens and young adults today that have been actually changing the world by their own means without help from any government or organization. I would be lying if I said I disapproved.

I cannot handle it when the idea of changing the world is shoved down my throat.

Here’s why: I’m a teenager in high school. I have enough responsibilities as it is, and besides, these are some of the worst/best years of my life.

I’m not supposed to be worrying about the nature of the world; I should be worrying about my grades, parties, and dating, all the factors of high school that we hate/love. In my defense I do read the newspaper, support causes, and can see beyond high school.

It needs to be noted that we cannot all change the world. If we work together and unite of course we can, but the idea that we should all go out and “be the change” we want to see will ultimately conflict. We can’t all bring our own idea of change, because our ideas are different and sometimes opposite.

We have become responsible for the future of the human race, even if we didn’t cause the problems. When people start to ask me what I’m planning on doing with my life while I’m just a junior in high school—I want to sit around on a couch  for a couple of hours to prove a point. It’s childish, but it’s true.

This is one of the few times in my life where I can slack off and be excused because of my age. So for those of you who are gonna go out and grab the world by its tail and wrap it around and put it in your pocket, go for it (you don’t need my confirmation). Just let some of us be “normal” teenagers. What if I don’t want to change anything?

The Garfield Peer Mentor program has accepted applications from sophomores, juniors, and seniors to help these minnows by meeting them in one of their classes for thirty-five minutes on every half day. Besides buffing up one’s college applications, interviewees apply for Peer Mentoring because of what they learned when they were freshmen. Recent acceptant junior Ben Schechter joined because of his previous experience.

“I enjoyed it freshman year in McCormick’s class, so I thought maybe I could help freshman enjoy it,” states Ben. Another acceptant, Lauren Schechter, was excited as well.

“I love the idea of giving freshman advice,” raves Lauren. They are the protective mother fish, teaching the little ones how to hunt and how to swim through their first year in the great Garfield Ocean.

The freshmen get to play fun games, ask questions, get answers, eat delicious goods brought in by the cute senior girls, and get help from older students. But the mentors have not met with the freshman yet this year.

Reasons for this are based upon the overflow of students from the incoming class. Peer Mentors had been assigned to the Language Arts department because of the fact that they are the only all-freshman classes, allowing mentoring for the freshmen only as intended. Last year, the program made its home in the Science Department.

But since this year there are no freshman-only science classes and the History Department does not want to host the program, all prospects look toward the Language Arts department, which looks back with reluctance. This is frustrating for those who are trying to lead the program to a higher reputation.

“It was really disorganized and poorly run in the past, so teachers aren’t willing to give us a shot,” recalls head mentor and  Garfield senior Annika Brauer. A main goal they have set up is a focus on non-academic interests for freshmen. Helping the freshmen get involved in clubs at school or in extra-curricular activities are objectives.

Even with the optimistic Head Mentors and enthusiastic applicants like Ben and Lauren, Peer Mentors have yet to meet this year with the freshmen, but they have their sights set on the next early dismissal day.

“We have scheduled curriculums and dates, so we can get going as soon as possible” says Head Mentor and junior Emily Proulx.

We can only hope that the plankton (minnows become plankton, trust me I took genetics) of the Garfield deep will be appropriately protected.

It has begun to rival Alder in population size as after school a select few juniors and seniors mingle on the premises. Personally I prefer to “kick it on Alder” (I can’t say that with a straight face) after school or possibly at lunch, and when I do, I seldom have any problems, besides no one standing or talking with me. My fellow students who choose to hang on Spruce do not have the same luck.

Recently, reports of a heavier police presence on the street have sparked complaint amongst its frequent visitors.

“Cops just roll up and tell us to leave” says Joe*, a Garfield student who frequents the spot. “If they think we’re a problem, we’re a problem.” Joe’s view is reflected amongst his friends who also go to Spruce. Moving the “problem” won’t actually solve the “problem”, it would just move it.

Recently enforced rules that disallow students to stay at Garfield unless they are participating in an after-school event push students away from the school, and every day the loudspeaker announces this. At the front of the school the whistles are blown and the students scatter.

If asked about why they meet at Spruce, the average student who does would probably say it’s because of the uncomfortable presence of the administration on alder. This uneasiness has been transferred to Spruce Street as police have been making routine drive-thrus almost everyday, either at lunch or after school.

Given this, some congregate at Spruce to be off of the school’s property, but close enough to the school that it’s easy to get to.

The Seattle Municipal Code defines two types of loitering: Drug Traffic and Prostitution. Police presence is increased in areas that have frequent violations, but no charges have been brought upon the teens on the street, though they have still been told to leave again and again. Teens hanging out on a street are bound to attract attention from police.

“This one time a cop car was parked facing us just like watching us eat our lunch and no one was doing anything [bad],” says Garfield junior Grace Miller, another student who prefers to hang out with her friends on Spruce. Situations in which the police have singled someone out, talked to the person and even searched them are not unheard of.

This jump in interactions with the local law enforcement has decreaesed these students’ faith in authority, as has the increased presence of the administration on Alder St.

Spruce Street is outside Garfield’s property, so police are now the primary authority figures enountered by the students. When on school grounds, such as Alder, the administrators are in charge. Some go off property because of the Administration, but then when the police harass them, it could be better to be under the jurisdiction of the school. Trust between teenagers and police is often strained, but to some the other option of first authority (administration) may be less likeable.

Moreover, the last confrontation with the administration has threatened the future of the street as a hangout.Administrators recently ordered kids to leave the street immediately at the end of school. The students then sat in their car, and the administrators responded with warnings that cars on the street would be towed if the “situation” continued, and even took pictures of some license plates. It is unclear how they would tow the cars, as they are parked in legal spots. Students are outraged and the tension between administrators and the students is palpable.

Even with the recent conflicts, students on the street remain immovable. As Garfield senior Will Comstock puts it, “Spruce is the more real, replacement alder, and if they shove us off that, we’ll make a new one.”

*Name has been changed

The main reason that Washington state citizens cannot purchase hard liquor at large supermarkets and independent markets is because of the current monopoly that the state has on liquor sales—all liquor is sold by the state itself (liquor stores are organized numerically, like number 182 that resides on 23rd and Union. There are about 22 stores in Seattle alone, and about 315 in the entire state.

Under the current conditions, in which all liquor stores are state-run, all taxes and profit margins flow back to the state, funding health care, substance abuse prevention programs, and even schools. The fact that liquor sales benefit the state with a ton of money is difficult to ignore.

“Last year, we returned $370.3 million to state and local governments,” says Brian Smith, the communications director for the Washington State Liquor Control Board, however, the current monopoly that the state has over liquor sales has prompted the proposal of two new initiatives that will be on the ballot for the November 2nd election.

The proposed Initiative 1100 allows the privatization of liquor sales throughout the state—stores ranging from gas stations to independent grocery stores to huge chains like Costco would be able to sell spirits. The state would retain its ability to tax liquor, and currently licensed stores in good standing would be able to sell spirits for an additional license fee.

The second initiative, Initiative 1105, would enact the same laws with the exception that it would allow the Liquor Board to still manage licenses, and would require retailers to buy from a third party distributor.

The general push for liquor reform and a long-lasting resentment of “prohibition era” laws are the driving forces behind these two initiatives. Owners of Costco and other chain superstores have openly supported these initiatives for the simple reason that they would rake in additional revenue from hard liquor sales. Supporters of the initiative believe that the state pension system is burdened by the large amount of state workers.

If liquor stores were to close, more privately owned business jobs would be created and the existing markup tax on hard alcohol would be eliminated. Another part of the argument for the initiative is that consumer convenience would be augmented—regular customers could head down to their local market and purchase whatever liquor their hearts desire.

Currently, liquor imports are monitored by the state and only certain varieties are allowed to be imported. With the passing of Initiative 1100, the diversity of the spirits would presumably increase as a result of competition.

It’s estimated that the elimination of the tax markup on liquor would lose the state $276 million dollars with the approval of I-1100, and $730 million with the approval of I-1105, as calculated by the state’s budget office.

The fear of losing business is not the only issue. To some, increased availability to harder alcohol is viewed as a threat to the safety of our society.

In response, the Yes to I-1100 campaign argues that not everyone who could get a license to sell would.

Still, the No campaign argues  that the number of retailers would climb to 4,580. Some privately owned businesses would likely not consider seeking a license because of the anticipated competition that the initiative would bring. Steve Shulman, the owner of Leschi Mart, is against the initiative.

“I would rather not sell hard liquor, but if it happens I’d probably be forced to serve some,” says Steve. As an owner of a small business, Steve is aware that the new market created by the initiatives would be much harder to compete in.

“I think the idea of alcohol at every 7–11, mom and pop, and small grocery is a little extreme.”

Even with Washington State as the nation’s leader in preventing underage drinking, minors still find ways to get their drink on. Undoubtedly, fears of increased underage drinking and drunk-driving issues are felt.

This fear is well-supported by research and data. State liquor stores have a “No Sales to Minors” compliance rate of 94 percent, while privately owned businesses’ rates ramge from 76 to 84 percent.

“In the public sector, all sorts of things can happen,” says Smith, the aforementioned communications director for WSLCB.

As election day fast approaches, campaign activity on both sides of the initiatives reaches an all-time high. However, we must keep our calm and composure as voters; these initiatives are some of the most important in the realization of our future state, and in the realm of underage drinking, they’re probably some of the most dangerous.