Kubby qualifies for November Ballot

Email from Steve Kubby:

The South Lake Tahoe City Clerk just called me to officially notify me that I have qualified as a candidate for City Council. I’ll be running against ten other candidates, which is good, because it will seriously split the good old boy vote. Furthermore, since this is a minor election with a small turn out and if our pro-cannabis voters all show up, as I think they will, we will have the biggest share of votes. That means we could have a very good chance of electing three pro cannabis council members, to a five member City Council, giving us a majority vote on the issues.

28 thoughts on “Kubby qualifies for November Ballot

  1. jack

    … so it’s all about the smoke?

    I really would rather have a honest, civic & public safety minded individual that was able to analyze complex budget and administrative issues — not jonesing for a pizza during a meeting…

  2. Thomas L. Knapp


    Is it “all about the smoke?”

    Of course not. But from an economic development standpoint, there are certain things worth noting.

    1) South Lake Tahoe is located in a medical marijuana state.

    2) South Lake Tahoe is located in a state where marijuana will likely be more generally legal after the November election.

    3) South Lake Tahoe is located on the border of that state with another state.

    4) South Lake Tahoe is located in an area with a heavy tourism component to its economy.

    A cannabis-friendly city council could be the difference between South Lake Tahoe’s economy growing as more skiers choose it over Aspen/Vail and gamblers make the hour-or-so drive up from Reno, or shrinking as some other area city decides it’s willing to be the Amsterdam of the California/Nevada border area.

  3. Mike Theodore

    and note that Kubby has based his criticism on the infrastructure of South Lake Tahoe. I remember driving over roads that didn’t even try to match the beauty of the land that the town is surrounded by.

  4. Catholic Trotskyist

    The Catholic Trotskyist Party of America endorses Steve Kubby for this race.

  5. Steve Kubby

    I love the Green Party, but I worry that Greens are all too eager to pass laws in which the government has the power to regulate the environment. Since the US government is the world’s biggest polluter, that’s like allowing the Fox to guard the Chicken Coop. As a Libertarian, who shares a profound distrust of government, I would only favor empowering the Fox, so long as the Chickens are well-armed.

  6. Steve Kubby

    I am very grateful for my Libertarian friends and I especially appreciate their support for my campaign. The City of South Lake Tahoe has a $100 million budget and the current council has been investigated and denounced as “dysfunctional” by the county grand jury. As a result three positions are available on the five member board, with the incumbents all refusing to run again. We can with this!

  7. jack

    No offense intended; good exchange of opinions:

    “Amsterdam of the California/Nevada border area” ?

    Have you been to Amsterdam? We don’t want any of those problems; just walk down a non-tourist area and then say you want SLT to be that way….

    “Proponents of legalization almost certainly would cite Amsterdam as the drug Mecca of the Western world. Anyone may go into the restaurants in this city and order marijuana and hashish from a menu; further, heroin and cocaine have been decriminalized for all practical purposes. The police simply leave the users alone. Consequently, health officials estimate that Amsterdam has 7,000 addicts, 20% of whom are foreigners. These addicts are responsible for 80% of all property crime in the city, thus necessitating that Amsterdam maintain a police presence far greater than those of cities of comparable size in the United States.”

    “Drug violators account for 50 percent of the Dutch prison population, a higher proportion than in the United States”. (Druglibrary.com / myths)

    Decriminalizing doesn’t make the subsequent related crimes go away.

  8. Thomas L. Knapp


    I was referring to Amsterdam in a very narrow respect: It’s a destination where marijuana use is legal, closely located to places where it isn’t.

    South Lake Tahoe doesn’t have any, if much say, as to whether or not marijuana is legal. It’s already legal in California for medical purposes and will probably be legal for other purposes after November. That’s just a fact.

    To the extent that this will have an economic impact, will that impact be positive or negative?

    If South Lake Tahoe takes a prohibition/nanny government approach, they’ll get all the down side and none of the up side.

    If South Lake Tahoe takes a pro-freedom approach, they’ll maximize the up side and minimize the down side.

    Kubby’s approach to the job of city council isn’t “all about the smoke.” It’s about keeping the council concentrated on the things it needs to do — keeping the potholes filled and protecting the citizens from crimes against persons or property — instead of on bad ideas like trying to make the city less free than the rest of the state of California at great expense, to the city’s detriment, and with little likelihood of “success.”

  9. The Green Party

    is communist; it represents a failed ideology which is also completely counter to the Libertarian principle of freedom of choice.

    Referencing wikipedia’s entry for the Green Party,
    its ideology is as follows (my comments in brackets):

    “Grassroots democracy
    Social justice and equal opportunity[euphemism for equality of reward no matter the economic results]
    Ecological wisdom[according to whom, which group of ruling
    Community-based economics
    Feminism and gender equality
    Respect for diversity
    Personal and global responsibility
    Future focus and sustainability”

  10. paulie Post author

    @14 not so. See:


    Libertarianism is a philosophy of acceptable means. There is no inherent conflict in using libertarian means to achieve all the above green goals.

    In fact, I believe it is the only way they can actually be achieved in reality.

    Furthermore, I think this kind of synthesis is the best way to market libertarianism to its most available and untapped potential audience.

  11. The Green Party

    Got a better Idea. Look at the Smallest Political Quiz. Right up there with the Communist Party. Don’t take my word. It there.

  12. The Green Party


    44% of Americans agree when asked if they consider themselves “fiscally conservative and socially liberal, also known as libertarian”.

    This test will tell if you’re one of them.
    Clicking a question changes its answer
    0 = government decides How free should you be? full freedom = 10
    10 From government censorship? To buy any foreign product? 0
    10 From government monitoring? To not subsidize corporations & farms? 0
    10 From government religiousness? To invest your own retirement savings? 0
    0 To donate for any political ad? To control your child’s tuition dollars? 0
    0 To risk your own body? To shop for your health insurance? 0
    10 To marry the same gender? To hire any healer or buy any medicine? 0
    10 To choose whether to procreate? To risk your own money? 0
    5 To pay for adult entertainment? To accept any currency or interest rate? 0
    0 To own a gun if you’re an adult? To take a job at any wage? 0
    5 To use drugs if you’re an adult? To keep what you earn, produce, trade? 0
    60 Current score: Leftist 0

  13. The Green Party

    when you click on Democrap, this is close. When you click on Communist Party, The greens come closer to the These party but no where near the Libertarian party. End of Story.

  14. paulie Post author

    No, it’s not the end of the story.

    Read the link


    Then there would be something to talk about.

    Until you do, you are merely talking from ignorance.

    There is nothing inherently statist about green values, although many greens do prefer statist means on many economic issues – this is not inherent in the key values.

    On peace and civil liberties, there is a lot of common ground, and even on some economic issues. On the rest, it’s a matter of how green values are applied, not of the values themselves.

  15. question

    Cannabis is for Cancer patients?
    The American Cancer Society “does not advocate inhaling smoke, nor the legalization of marijuana,” although the organization does support carefully controlled clinical studies for alternative delivery methods, specifically a THC skin patch.

    The American Academy of Pediatrics asserted that with regard to marijuana use, “from a public health perspective, even a small increase in use, whether attributable to increased availability or decreased perception of risk, would have significant ramifications

    The IOM found “…potential therapeutic value of cannabinoid drugs, primarily THC, for pain relief, control of nausea and vomiting, and appetite stimulation.” However, it pointed out that “[t]he effects of cannabinoids on the symptoms studied are generally modest, and in most cases there are more effective medications [than smoked marijuana].” (but not as fun as getting high without fear of getting arrested? –J.)

    According to two studies, marijuana use narrows arteries in the brain, “similar to patients with high blood pressure and dementia,” and may explain why memory tests are difficult for marijuana users. In addition, “chronic consumers of cannabis lose molecules called CB1 receptors in the brain’s arteries,” leading to blood flow problems in the brain which can cause memory loss, attention deficits, and impaired learning ability. (that’s who we need trying to lead the City to success…. –J.)

    No competent medical authority supports the SMOKING OF ANYTHING as “medicine”. The American Medical Association (AMA) and its Canadian and UK counterparts agree that Marijuana is not medicine.

    The only thing I agree with is that you can have your own opinion (like the compassionate use act matters) but not your own facts – see above.

  16. question

    I guess this user will be blocked along with “Jack”? No worries, I’ll move on to a more mature and open forum to discuss this issue… cheers,

  17. paulie Post author

    No one is blocked here. Occassionally our automated spam filter makes mistakes. If you emailed us instead of jumping to conclusions, we could have pulled your comment from spam. As it is, too late, sorry.

    Here’s an email from Bob Newland, in case you come back here…

    Hello Everyone;

    Here’s a little story.

    I met Matthew Ducheneaux in 1998. In ‘85, he rolled his car, drunk, and broke his neck. For the rest of his life he was paralyzed from the neck down, with a little movement in a couple of fingers on his left hand. He could operate the controls of a motorized wheelchair with finger and thumb.

    In ‘89 Matt was accepted into the Compassionate Investigational New Drugs Study (CINDS) . Created in 1978, CINDS is administrated by the FDA. 30 patients were sent 300 rolled cannabis cigarets per month for a while (5 still receive them), supposedly in a government study of the therapeutic effect of cannabis on otherwise untreatable conditions.

    Hundreds more people were accepted into the program, but they fell into Matt’s category. That is, they were approved by the FDA to receive cannabis from the government, but the DEA created such stringent rules for them that they were unable to take advantage of the medical treatment. In 1992, the Bush administration ended the program because they saw that AIDS patients were living too long when they were able to use cannabis to stimulate their appetites.

    In Matt’s case, the DEA required that the government cannabis be sent to a pharmacy, where he could pick up a few days’ supply at a time. Matt found a drugstore in Sioux Falls that agreed to accept the responsibility. The DEA then required the pharmacy to maintain a 24-hour armed guard on the cannabis. The pharmacy pulled out of that deal, understandably.

    As with every single government constraint on cannabis, the DEA’s requirements made no sense. Pharmacies are not required to keep an armed guard on their stocks of morphine and oxycodone.

    Matt was able to fill his prescription at the same drugstore where you and I and your grandkids get their cannabis. That store is never closed, doesn’t require ID or prescription, and provides its own security.

    When I met Matt, I was on the ballot as the Libertarian nominee for governor of SD. I went to his trailer house in Sioux Falls. As I walked in, I saw his feet legs trembling, his feet beating a tattoo on the floor. The salt and pepper shakers on his table were marching toward the edge.

    He pointed to the table, where I saw a box with papers and a bag of weed. “Roll me a doob, man,” he said. I did, lit it, and held it to his mouth. He drew, exhaled, and the tremors stopped. “Thanks,” he smiled.

    Spastic tremors, involuntary muscle contractions, are a common affliction among the spinally injured and those with MS. Sometimes they are so strong that they throw people out of their wheelchairs or break bones.

    In 2000, Ducheneaux was arrested at the Jazz and Blues Festival in Sioux Falls. A cop spotted him medicating in a secluded area away from the crowd. He was charged with misdemeanor possession.

    In 2002, his case went to trial, after some of the most tortured SoDak Supreme Court decisions regarding the accepted common law premise that a person may violate the letter of the law in order to prevent a greater harm. For instance, a person may use a boat not his own without permission in order to save a drowning person. Apparently, the court felt that does not apply if the drowning person is yourself.

    Magistrate Patricia Riepel in Sioux Falls would have allowed Matt to present the defense that cannabis alleviated his suffering, and he would have prevailed in front of a jury. Senior Circuit Judge Peter Lieberman overruled Riepel, so the trial was held without that defense.

    Matt told his story to the jury. Riepel was then compelled to tell the jury, “Doesn’t matter. He had weed, you must find him guilty.” They did. Riepel sentenced Matt to 30 days in jail, credit for one day served, the rest suspended. She fined him $250, asking if he needed time to pay it.

    Matt said, “I will never pay it.” She smiled and said, “Take as much time as you need.”

    Matt died in 2005. He aspirated and choked on a device he wore in his mouth at night to prevent him from grinding his teeth.

    As I write this, if there were an opponent to IM13 (medical marijuana) in my office, I am in a mood that would lead me to adjust that opponent’s attitude with the axe handle I keep around to protect my stash of medicine.

  18. paulie Post author

    From the Advocates:

    Reefer Madness: Marijuana Arrests Near Record High

    Police arrested a staggering 858,408 persons for marijuana violations in 2009, according to FBI figures released this month.

    That’s the second highest ever reported — just a few thousand victims short of the all-time record of 872,721 arrests in 2007.

    Looking more closely at these figures:

    * Marijuana arrests now comprise more than one-half (approximately 52%) of all drug arrests reported in the United States.

    * About 88% of those charged with marijuana violations (758,593 Americans) were charged with possession only.

    * The remaining 99,815 individuals were charged with “sale/manufacture,” a broad category that includes virtually *all* cultivation offenses — even those where the marijuana was being grown for personal or medical use.

    * The number of marijuana arrests far exceeded the total number of arrests in the U.S. the same year for all violent crimes combined (582,000) — including murder, manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery and aggravated assault.

    * 61,164 people were arrested for pot possession in California alone. California will vote this fall on a proposition to legalize possession and cultivation of marijuana.

    * Marijuana arrests have almost tripled since the early 1990s.

    * At this rate there is a marijuana smoker arrested roughly every 37 seconds in America.

    * The effects of an arrest can be devastating, notes Paul Armentano of NORML:

    “Probation and mandatory drug testing; loss of employment; loss of child custody; removal from subsidized housing; asset forfeiture; loss of student aid; loss of voting privileges; loss of adoption rights…” and of course, for some, time behind bars.

    * The War on Marijuana is largely waged against young Americans. In 2007, according to NORML, three out of four of those arrested were under age 30; one in four were 18 or younger.

    * According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 16.7 million Americans used marijuana in the past month. Other studies show marijuana use in America is on the rise, despite nearly a million arrests annually. How’s that Drug War working for ya, Mr. Drug Czar?

    * The above figures clearly show that the War on Drugs is largely a War on Marijuana, and one waged largely against young adult pot smokers.

    “Most Americans — rightly — would be outraged to learn that our nation’s so-called War on Drugs is really just an assault on young adults caught with small bags of weed,” said Armentano last year.


    Quick Shots…


    “In almost every respect imaginable, [alcohol] Prohibition was a failure. It encouraged criminality and institutionalized hypocrisy. It deprived the government of revenue, stripped the gears of the political system, and proposed profound limitations on individual rights.” — former New York Times editor Daniel Okrent, from his new book Last Call: The Rise and Fall of Prohibition.

    * PROFILES IN POT HYPOCRISY: “The last three presidents opposed legalizing marijuana, even though President Obama says he smoked marijuana, George W. Bush hinted that he did and Bill Clinton said he did not inhale.” – syndicated columnist Debra J. Saunders, “End Prohibition; Yes on Proposition 19.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *