Psychedelics measure opposed by 57% of voters is expected to pass in some form within 10 years

The Massachusetts ballot included a question that would have legalized certain psychedelics for therapeutic and personal use, including some grown in people’s homes, but voters rejected it Tuesday, with 57 percent opposed to 43 percent in favor.

The organization behind the Yes on 4 campaign, Massachusetts for Mental Health Options, said in a press release Tuesday night it would “keep fighting to find new pathways for all those who struggle with their mental health.”

“There were concerns about the home grow provisions, and those concerns likely led to tonight’s result,” but the group said work would continue with legislators on advocating “for access, for hope and for healing.”

Even opponents said they would support a form of legalized use of psychedelics – with “basic guardrails” in place – and that they expected a law to pass within the next 10 years after there’s been more research on the medical use of psychedelics.

“Let us study it so we can figure out the right patients, the right doses and what the interactions are,” said Anahita Dua, a vascular surgeon at Massachusetts General Hospital and an associate professor of surgery at Harvard Medical School. “Wouldn’t it be amazing if psychiatrists could prescribe it, if people being able to get it would be a federal law, so Medicare could cover it, if everyone who needs it could benefit?”

The ballot measure would have allowed people 21 and above to grow, possess and use psilocybin and psilocin, which come from mushrooms, and dimethyltryptamine, mescaline and ibogaine, which come from plants. These substances would have been available for purchase at approved locations for supervised use with a licensed facilitator, not in retail stores. But the law would also allow anyone 21 or older to grow these substances in a 12-foot by 12-foot area in their home and to give away personal use amounts to others.

The proposed law included the creation of a five-person panel for regulations and record keeping called the Natural Psychedelic Substances Commission, similar to the state’s Cannabis Control Commission.

If it were up to Cambridge and Somerville voters, it would have passed: 57 percent of Cantabrigians who voted on the question were in favor, and it was even more popular in Somerville. Voters in that city approved of it 66 percent to 34 percent.

Foes are relieved

The Coalition for Safe Communities, the official ballot committee organized to urge voters to vote no on Question 4, believes the part of the law that would have allowed individuals to grow up to 144 square feet of psychedelics on their properties would have led to an unregulated black market.

“We were never arguing against the medicinal value of this, but the ballot question, the way it was written, was not about medicine,” said Chris Keohan, who ran the campaign pushing voters to say no.

“As a father of two young kids, I found the campaign they were running to be offensive, and that’s what mobilized me to get involved,” Keohan said.

Although psychedelic drugs have been shown to be viable treatments for mental health conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder and anxiety, it’s unclear how they could react with other drugs.

Side effects may include

Dua, who was involved with the coalition, warned about the effects of mixing the drugs.

“As a patient, you need to be informed about what interactions exist, and the problem with psychedelics is that we just don’t know enough about them,” Dua said. “Let’s say you have a patient with schizophrenia, who’s on a drug that affects neurotransmitters in the brain. You couple it with a psychedelic, you could send them into a fully blown psychotic state. We just don’t know.”

Dua thinks psychedelics should be administered only after further research.

“If you’re giving something to veterans, who are often older people, which is my patient population, you need to know what the interaction is with at least some of the standard drugs,” Dua said.

The Coalition for Safe Communities also took issue with the part of the measure that would create treatment centers where people could buy psychedelics for use in facilities, because they would be for-profit, suggesting these centers would put corporate profits above public health.

Advocates will keep fighting

Endorsed by the Massachusetts chapter of Disabled Veterans and by Sen. Elizabeth Warren and U.S. Rep. Seth Moulton, a Marine Corps veteran, the Massachusetts for Mental Health Options group advocated for residents to vote yes on Question 4 for the benefit psychedelics can provide for people struggling with mental health conditions.

Oregon approved a similar ballot measure in 2020, as did Colorado in 2022. In Somerville, the measure was officially supported by city councilors Jesse Clingan, Matthew McLaughlin, Jake Wilson, Judy Pineda Neufeld and Willie Burnley Jr., as well as state representative for Somerville Erika Uyterhoeven. In Cambridge, city councillors Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler, Patty Nolan, Sumbul Siddiqui and Ayesha Wilson pledged their support, as did state Rep. Mike Connolly and vice mayor Marc McGovern.

“We spoke to tens of thousands of Massachusetts voters and heard broad agreement that natural psychedelics should be more accessible to those who cannot find relief through traditional medication and therapy,” a group statement said.

MA for Mental Health did not respond immediately to requests for further comment.

A later possibility

Keohan said he can see Massachusetts legalizing the limited use of psychedelics in the future, after more research has been done and with more regulations.

“And honestly, I would support it,” he said – if a medical professional were required to be on-site at treatment facilities, if there were price caps for users of the service and no growing of psychedelics in homes.

“If those guardrails were in place, I would support a yes vote, and I would be happy to try to get this passed at the State House,” Keohan said.

Dua agrees it’s possible, and would support it with a redefined structure as well.

She doesn’t think Massachusetts should rush it, as she believes it did by putting this question on the 2024 ballot.

“I bet you in the next five, 10 years it’s going to be on the market, but appropriately and for the right people,” Dua said. “We need to protect the ones that could be hurt and help the ones that can be helped.”

A stronger

Please consider making a financial contribution to maintain, expand and improve Cambridge Day.

We are now a 501(c)(3) nonprofit and all donations are tax deductible.

Please consider a recurring contribution.

Donate now