Open Letter for California Psychedelic Users, Voters, & Tax Payers - UPDATE!
SB 1012 (Sponsor: Senator Scott Wiener) - The Regulated Psychedelic Facilitators Act and the Regulated Psychedelic-Assisted Therapy Act
Effective May 16th, SB1012 was “shelved” in the appropriations committee. This means SB1012 is effectively dead for this session.
We are not celebrating this moment. I wished to have seen it amended to include decriminalization. However, this outcome is preferred to the bill being passed as is.
It’s not over. The trend is in the right direction. We’ll be back with a better, simpler, cleaner version WITH decriminalization in it, hopefully.
Before the UPDATE
This is part of the non-profit advocacy work we do to enable safe and ethical access to psychedelic substances, facilitators, clinics, and retreats.
Why Mind Lumen Opposes SB1012 (for now)
SB1012 is a medicalization ONLY bill, as it’s currently written. We are not opposed to legalization or medicalization. We are opposed to this without decriminalization included.
The previous two bills, SB58 and SB519, were primarily decriminalization bills. This one isn’t. We advocated for SB58 and SB519. We are now advocating in opposition to this bill as it doesn’t address the core issue of making it SAFE and ACCESSIBLE without treating SEEKERS and FACILITATORS, as criminals. More people have moved in favor of decriminalization and the trend is moving faster in that direction.
Mind Lumen has been about transparency from the beginning. I am sharing this letter that I sent to the Senator Scott Wiener and my representative Assemblyman Matt Haney (San Francisco).
I hope that after you read this, you will join me if you are a California voter and taxpayer, in writing a letter to your senator and representative and calling them to make the amendments to add a decriminalization component, or oppose it if it isn’t amended.
Here is the template of this letter for you to use and add your own voice. The appropriations committee is holding a hearing on May 16th, 2024 so it’s vital that your voice is heard by clicking on this link, uploading your letter, and sending an email to: sapr@sen.ca.gov
An Open Letter
Dear [California Legislators]:
I am sending a letter in opposition to SB1012, unless amended. I really would like to see progress and it saddens me to oppose it but I have to live with my conscience. I am a strong advocate for safe and ethical access to psychedelics (the classics at least), as I was for SB58 and SB519, working with the coalition on those bills. This bill continues to criminalize the beneficial use of these plant-based substances that are proven safe and effective. This bill doesn’t advance safe access to the majority of California voters and taxpayers. Instead, it will set that back even further.
People aren’t going to wait. It took me 3 years to find help. My sister suffered from debilitating depression. We want everyone to be safe and have access. We are a harm reduction navigation service for therapeutic use. I spoke at the Oxford University-Johns Hopkins joint conference on the ethical use of these medicines - HOPE consensus statement. Hope you will read this statement as it will be helpful to policy makers.
The recent University of Berkeley survey shows the support for medicalized vs decriminalized is evenly split, ~2% difference. The overwhelming majority of California eligible voters are between 18-49, and this is also the fastest growing group. They support decriminalization by an average of 73%.
California is running a deficit and this bill will add to it, make it expensive, and therefore inaccessible to most of the voters, given the cost of our health care system and poor outcomes. A simpler decrim regulation will cost little to nothing and make it safer and more accessible to a larger number of voters and cost less to taxpayers.
The stigma behind psychedelic substances overshadows their legitimate value as medicine. You know very well that the War on Drugs halted this scientific progress and among many things, created a system of criminalization to deter drug use that is not founded in science, and continues to be a colossal waste of money.
Without decriminalizing the personal possession and use of at least the classic serotonergic and plant based psychedelics, which cause no harm to anyone else, I cannot support this legislation and would urge the members of my communities to advocate against it, as it’s currently written. Not all drugs have the same level of risks so they shouldn’t be treated the same. Even MDMA and Ketamine, which are not true psychedelics, are riskier than any of the plant-based classic psychedelics, but nothing compared to alcohol.
What is the most dangerous drug? (source: The Economist)
Criminalizing people for using something that is safe and effective causes more harm and makes it even more UNSAFE. Nothing in life is a 100% risk free. We can manage the risks here.
It is time that California stop criminalizing people that possess and use substances that have immense potential and look towards how California should thoughtfully regulate use of these substances. SB 1012 is setting a terrible precedent. California should improve on Colorado’s initiative to take an incremental step forward with a simple and safe decriminalized regulated model. I would welcome the opportunity to work with your office on a simpler decriminalized component added to this bill - example of simpler decriminalization framework bill. AFAIK, the Governor didn’t say that he is opposed to a decrim + medicalized bill.
The following changes to the bill would help broaden support for passage:
Decriminalize personal possession and consumption (no commercial selling or distribution)
Anonymized testing available at any venue or event including testing services to operate without liability (similar to Kosmicare in EU). Commercial labs can be regulated so they can offer higher quality, lab grade testing.
No one loses their job for using a psychedelic substance off hours
No one loses their license for recommending psychedelic therapy in a non-clinical setting even if they can’t prescribe it.
Other changes I’d like to see:
The majority members of the board should not be from the medical establishment without personal experience of at least 2-3 psychedelic therapeutic sessions in a non-clinical setting
Ease the licensing requirements so facilitators who are trained via harm reduction organizations like Zendo Project or Fireside Project are grandfathered.
I believe that a medicalized AND decriminalized model can co-exist. For serious mental health conditions like schizophrenia or bipolar 1, a medical route is the safest option. However, for most other mental health conditions, a non-medical, non-clinical setting is the better option which should be decriminalized.
Respectfully, Neil Gehani
Founding Sherpa, Mind Lumen