This post is part of an ongoing series summarizing state-based psychedelic reforms intended for policy professional professionals.
As America’s political machine focuses on the upcoming election, most state-level legislative activity on psychedelics has slowed until legislatures reconvene in the spring.
For now, the Massachusetts ballot initiative to legalize botanical psychedelics (Question 4) is the most impactful prospective statutory reform. Graham Moore, educational outreach director of Yes on 4 and Massachusetts for Mental Health Options, published a lengthy open letter to Dr. Anahita Dua, chair of the Coalition for Safe Communities, a coalition opposed to the ballot measure. Moore argues that the evidence demonstrates how psilocybin is not a threat to public health based on clinical and observational evidence. Limited personal possession of psilocybin should be legalized, he writes, “especially in light of the observational research suggesting naturalistic psychedelics use is more beneficial than harmful.”
The campaign for Yes on 4 has racked up some early endorsements, including state Sen. Jamie Eldridge (D-Marlborough) and state Rep. Lindsay Sabadosa (D-Northampton). In an op-ed for the Commonwealth Beacon, the two legislators argue: “There is an emergent need for more effective therapeutic interventions in the US and psychedelic-assisted therapy is a powerful tool to add to the arsenal when traditional forms of treatment have proven ineffective.”
In Colorado, the regulatory process to implement a licensed market for facilitated psychedelic therapies continues apace. The Colorado Department of Revenue (DOR) has proposed fees for applications and renewals of professional licenses. Reason Foundation submitted comments arguing that the state’s proposed fees are too expensive, which will be a barrier for both small businesses and working-class patients.
For example, a site authorized to administer psilocybin services (“healing center”) will be charged a $14,000 annual license renewal fee. Although regulators propose licensing fees roughly comparable to those in cannabis, the market for psychedelic services is significantly smaller than for cannabis, so these fees will be amortized across a smaller volume of transactions. In a public hearing, a DOR representative argued that the agency needs nine full-time staff to efficiently process paperwork and administer regulatory oversight. As a result, they’ll need to increase fees after the program’s first few years significantly.
Reason Foundation, along with legal experts Joshua Kappel of Vicente and Tasia Poinsatte of the Healing Advocacy Fund, are urging DOR to consider lowering the proposed license fees.
In more promising news, Colorado will now permit a “handler’s” license for transporting psilocybin between the manufacturer and a healing center. The small change came after Reason Foundation and others submitted public changes. The change may allow facilitators to claim business deductions on their federal taxes because they will not technically be violating a law that forbids businesses that traffic in Schedule I drugs from tax exemptions. While this change may seem minor, slim-margin businesses need these deductions to remain profitable.
Additionally, the proposed regulations would allow an apprentice-type model for facilitators-in-training to earn money while studying for their license: “Training licensees may charge for services they provide to participants during this 6-month consultation period” (rule D.6).
Both welcome regulations could ultimately lower costs for consumers seeking treatment.