🫠 Psychonaut POV

Welcome to Tricycle Day. We’re the psychedelics newsletter that has been politically radicalized. We’re renouncing democracy and going full fungocracy. 🍄

Sam Chapman helped create the world's first regulated psilocybin program in Oregon. Mission accomplished, right? Not quite. Now he’s locked in with his new baby, the Center for Psychedelic Policy, to figure out how to make psychedelic therapy accessible far and wide.

We asked Sam what he learned auditing the nation’s legislative landscape surrounding psychedelics, why ballot measures have fallen out of favor, and how pilot programs could solve the affordability crisis that's keeping healing out of reach.

These guys have done the impossible.

First they bred a legal psychedelic mushroom strain. Then they made it incredibly easy to use.

For those who like it raw, Limitless sells whole mushrooms by the gram. Want convenience? Go for the capsules. And if you’ve got a sweet tooth, they offer gummies in multiple flavors.

Every product is lab tested, free of synthetics, and chock full of natural alkaloids and tryptamines that produce powerful psychedelic effects.

Whether you're microdosing or going deep, there's an option for you.

When I first got involved as the campaign manager for Oregon’s Measure 109, the goal was fairly straightforward: establish the first-ever state-regulated, licensed program for psilocybin therapy in the country. That was no small task. Spending six years helping build the program, and then stepping back for a year, made something clear: Oregon accomplished something historic that still isn’t fully understood or credited.

More than 15,000 people have now gone through Oregon’s program, with far fewer adverse events than even the architects of the program anticipated. Equally important, the program has operated without any federal intervention, something many skeptics assumed would be inevitable. The fact that it is functioning as designed and serving people is a major accomplishment.

Now that we’ve shown a state-based model can work and withstand scrutiny around safety, efficacy, and legality, the central unresolved question is affordability. The majority of people who stand to benefit still cannot access care. Everyone is asking how to solve this, but there have been relatively few proposals grounded in legislative and budgetary reality. That gap is what pulled me back in. Beyond policy, it’s also personal. Like many families, mine has experienced the limits of existing mental health care, reinforcing my belief that states need practical, evidence-based alternatives that people can actually afford.

The Center for Psychedelic Policy works with states to design, fund, and implement practical pathways to affordable psychedelic healing. Based on the data we’re collecting, the vast majority of people who could benefit are still not accessing care, the gap between need and access remains enormous, and that is what we are focused on closing.

The biggest shift we’re seeing is from ballot measures to legislative activity. Over the last five years, more than 250 psychedelic-related bills have been introduced across 38 states plus Washington, D.C. Legislative interest is accelerating, and we’re approaching a point where more states have introduced psychedelic legislation than had introduced medical cannabis at a comparable stage.

At the same time, the passage rate remains very low. Of those 250-plus bills, only about 5 percent have passed. That tells us interest is high, but many proposals are not yet aligned with what legislators feel comfortable advancing. The bills with the highest success rates tend to be what we call “starter bills”—study committees, task forces, and limited initiatives that allow states to engage without making sweeping commitments. Those pass far more often than bills attempting to build full regulatory frameworks from the outset.

Ballot measures offer voters a direct say, but they come with real constraints. Measure 109 cost just over $6 million to pass in Oregon, and Colorado’s effort cost even more. Since then, the funding environment has tightened considerably, shaped in part by the FDA's MDMA rejection and Massachusetts' ballot measure falling short. Without sufficient resources, ballot measures are increasingly difficult to pursue.

The core takeaway from the assessment is that legislative pathways now offer stronger prospects for passage and allow states to address affordability up front, rather than as an afterthought.

Oregon and Colorado have shown that states can stand up functional, safe psychedelic programs without triggering federal intervention. That alone has shifted the national conversation. Both states, however, are still confronting affordability challenges. In Oregon, the average session cost remains around $1,200, which has priced out most people who could benefit.

New Mexico is taking a narrower but instructive approach through its Medical Psilocybin Act. What makes the state especially worth watching is how lawmakers are pairing authorization with public investment. New Mexico has already appropriated $1 million to the Department of Health to stand up the program and hire staff, along with $500,000 to the University of New Mexico to support a psychedelic-assisted therapy research program. Legislative leaders are also working to secure an additional $500,000 for a treatment equity fund designed to subsidize care for people with limited means.

If that equity funding is secured, New Mexico would become the first state to deploy direct public dollars to support psilocybin therapy within a state-based access program. That represents a meaningful shift from authorizing access in principle to funding treatment in practice.

The broader significance is what comes next. If New Mexico can demonstrate strong outcomes for approved conditions at a comparable or lower cost than existing mental health investments, it becomes a powerful proof point. When states can show a clear return on public investment, conversations with budget committees, health agencies, Medicare, and insurers become far more grounded.

Pura Vida Collective's Jan 31 - Feb 7 retreat offers 5 medicine ceremonies in 8 days, but you choose what's aligned for you at each step. Their trauma-informed, integrative container is designed to help you move from fear to freedom.

Across states, one of the biggest drivers of high costs is the upfront infrastructure required to build a full regulatory program. Licensing systems, training requirements, facilities, and oversight all need to be established before a single patient is served, and those costs are ultimately passed on to participants.

Pilot programs allow states to take a more targeted approach. Instead of funding an entire regulatory ecosystem, a state can fund a defined number of participants, focus on specific conditions, and prioritize direct treatment subsidies. That significantly lowers per-patient costs while still allowing access to be delivered safely and responsibly.

Pilot programs also give states flexibility in how much risk they assume. More conservative states can subsidize treatment through existing legal pathways while collecting outcome and cost data. Others may choose to manage production, testing, and administration more directly. This adaptability allows programs to align with budget constraints, political comfort, and administrative capacity.

Clinical research has been essential to reaching this moment, but pilot programs are uniquely positioned to generate real-world evidence. They allow states to evaluate outcomes and costs alongside existing mental health treatments and assess whether psychedelic therapy can deliver better results at the same or lower cost.

Finally, pilot programs include built-in off-ramps. If a program fails to meet safety, cost, or outcome benchmarks, it can sunset without requiring lawmakers to unwind a permanent framework. That reversibility lowers political risk while allowing states to move forward in a disciplined, evidence-based way.

Advocates should focus less on the sheer number of bill introductions and more on building durable relationships with decision-makers who can move legislation. That often means committee chairs, budget leaders, agency officials, and the governor’s office. Introducing a bill is only the beginning.

Successful efforts anticipate objections early, understand budget dynamics, and engage stakeholders who may not be natural allies. Pragmatism matters. A bill does not need to be perfect to be meaningful. Incremental progress, paired with strong implementation and data collection, is how durable policy is built.

Over the next few years, the most effective efforts will center on policies that demonstrate value to the state. That means improved outcomes for people struggling with serious mental health conditions, alongside affordability and cost containment. Pilot programs and state-funded access mechanisms are especially powerful because they allow states to move forward responsibly while building the evidence needed for long-term investment.

My focus over the next year is to work with one or two states that are well positioned to advance this approach. If a state can show that publicly supported psilocybin therapy delivers better outcomes at a comparable or lower cost than existing treatments, it creates a roadmap others can follow. That is how momentum turns into sustained access.

Download the CPP’s full National Psychedelic Landscape Assessment, or reach out to learn how states, funders, and advocates can support pragmatic pathways to affordable access.

That’s all for today, Cyclists! Whenever you’re ready, here’s how we can help.

Forwarded this email? Subscribe here.

DISCLAIMER: This newsletter is for educational and informational purposes only and is not intended as a substitute for professional medical advice. The use, possession, and distribution of psychedelic drugs are illegal in most countries and may result in criminal prosecution.