California law enforcement leaders joined drug prevention experts on September 25th in an hour-long teleconference, passionately urging the governor to ban a bill that would decriminalize certain hallucinogens statewide.
The bill, known as Senate Bill 58 and authored by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), would permit individuals aged 21 and older to possess and transport small amounts of psychedelic substances, including psilocybin (commonly referred to as “magic mushrooms”). It would also allow for the cultivation of these drugs within specified limits.
After narrowly passing in both the Assembly and the Senate, the fate of the bill now rests in the hands of Gov. Gavin Newsom, who must decide whether to sign it into law or veto it by mid-October.
“SB 58 is actually taking a step backwards. We in the United States have spent decades and countless resources discouraging and restricting the use of cigarettes. But now, we are focused on legalizing the use of drugs that are extremely hazardous to someone’s health,” said Ed Pecis, president of the California Narcotics Officers Association—a Santa Clarita-based nonprofit law enforcement training organization—during the Monday morning conference.
However, Sen. Wiener argues that legalizing these drugs will provide much-needed relief for individuals suffering from mental health issues, particularly veterans.
“Veterans and anyone suffering from PTSD and depression should not face criminal penalties for seeking relief,” stated Sen. Wiener in a press release earlier this month. “Plant-based psychedelics are non-addictive and show tremendous promise at treating some of the most intractable drivers of our nation’s mental health crisis.”
However, the National Narcotic Officers Associations Coalition, representing over 60,000 law enforcement officers in the state, strongly opposes the bill. They argue that hallucinogens have serious health risks and criticize supporters of the bill as “no better than sleazy snake oil salesmen seeking to make a buck off the backs of the vulnerable,” in a letter sent to Gov. Newsom on September 15th.
While personal use of these substances would become legal after January 1, 2025, the bill also allows for treatment providers to use psychedelics in supervised settings once recommended by the state’s Health and Human Services Agency and approved by the Legislature. However, concerns have been raised about the potential dangers of allowing usage in larger group settings, as it may enable drug dealers.
“SB58 even aims at permitting social or group sharing eventually, which can give rise to colossal public safety problems. Allowing for group sharing or supported use is effectively giving the drug dealers a built-in defense,” said Frank Lee, vice president of California Coalition Against Drugs—a statewide organization of law enforcement groups—in a press release by the coalition and law enforcement and drug prevention groups.
Potential Dangers for Young Adults
Opponents of the bill, such as Joel Justice, president of the California College and University Police Chiefs Association, argue that psychedelic usage among college-aged students can lead to increased depression and anxiety in adulthood. He cited data from the Journal of Addiction during the conference, highlighting the potential risks.
According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, there were over 6,000 emergency hospital visits for hallucinogen misuse among youth aged 18 to 25 in 2020. Mr. Justice urged Gov. Newsom to consider the well-being of his own children and veto the bill.
Magic mushrooms contain the hallucinogen psilocybin. (Moha El-Jaw/Shutterstock)
Janet Rowse, an expert in drug prevention and executive director of Safe Launch—a nonprofit organization focused on youth substance prevention—argued that decriminalizing hallucinogens would only encourage their usage among the state’s youth.
“Increasing access through decriminalization and legalization of any intoxicant reduces the perceived harm and increases use… and that’s in the whole population,” she stated during the conference.
Ms. Rowse also pointed out the historical use of doctors’ recommendations by industries such as alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana to gain public trust. She emphasized that while there may be potential medical uses for these substances in controlled settings, they should not be normalized or made widely available.
Proponents of the bill, including the California Attorneys for Criminal Justice and the Law Enforcement Action Partnership, argue that psychedelics are increasingly being used to treat mental health issues such as PTSD, depression, and anxiety. They believe that the therapeutic potential of these substances outweighs the risks.
“Generations of anecdotal evidence and current clinical research at leading universities including Johns Hopkins, NYU, and UCLA point to therapeutic uses for psychedelic drugs in treating complex mental health issues,” wrote the Law Enforcement Action Partnership in support of the bill.
Only Proven Effective in Supervised Settings
However, opponents argue that psychedelics have only been proven effective in treating disorders within controlled settings, unlike what is proposed in SB 58. They cite concerns raised by Dr. Michael Bogenschutz, who oversees the psychedelic research program at New York University’s Langone Center for Psychedelic Medicine.
“We hope [psychedelics] will represent a major breakthrough, but we really can’t say that is true until we’ve accumulated and analyzed the evidence that is needed to make that determination,” said Dr. Bogenschutz in a TIME magazine article, which was quoted in the bill’s analysis.
A similar bill failed last year, which aimed to legalize a broader range of psychedelics. It was denied by the Assembly Appropriations Committee, which recommended funding research on the matter before considering legalization.
Health and Public Safety Risks
Opponents of the bill, such as Dr. Roneet Lev, former chief medical officer for the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, argue that bypassing safeguards such as FDA approval and established medical regulations poses risks to Californians’ health and safety.
“There are standards the FDA follows to make sure drugs do not have toxins, carcinogens, and contaminants. And there are currently many modalities and therapeutics that work for PTSD, depression, and anxiety. SB 58 circumvents the established medical and regulatory protections and places Californians in danger,” said Dr. Lev during the conference.
They also express concerns about the impact on law enforcement, including the need for additional training and the increased risk of DUI incidents.
Sheriff Mike Boudreaux, president of the California State Sheriffs Association, emphasized the challenges faced by law enforcement when dealing with individuals under the influence of hallucinogens during the conference.
The bill passed in the Assembly with a vote of 43-15 on September 6th and in the Senate with a vote of 21-14 the following day. Gov. Newsom now has until October 14th to make his decision.
What are the arguments made by opponents of California’s proposed bill to decriminalize psychedelic substances?
The Debate Over California’s Proposed Bill to Decriminalize Psychedelic Substances
On September 25th, California law enforcement leaders and drug prevention experts came together in a passionate teleconference, urging Governor Gavin Newsom to ban Senate Bill 58. This bill, authored by Senator Scott Wiener, aims to decriminalize certain hallucinogens, including psilocybin, commonly known as “magic mushrooms,” for individuals aged 21 and older. It also allows for the cultivation of these substances within specified limits. The fate of the bill now rests in the hands of Governor Newsom, who must decide whether to sign it into law or veto it by mid-October.
Opponents of the bill argue that it is a step backward in the efforts to discourage drug use and protect public health. Ed Pecis, president of the California Narcotics Officers Association, expressed his concerns during the teleconference, stating, “SB 58 is actually taking a step backwards. We in the United States have spent decades and countless resources discouraging and restricting the use of cigarettes. But now, we are focused on legalizing the use of drugs that are extremely hazardous to someone’s health.”
However, Senator Wiener maintains that legalizing these substances can provide much-needed relief for individuals suffering from mental health issues, particularly veterans. In a press release, he emphasized that veterans and anyone struggling with PTSD and depression should not face criminal penalties for seeking relief. He also highlighted the non-addictive nature of plant-based psychedelics and their potential in treating mental health crises.
The debate over the decriminalization of psychedelic substances is complex and multifaceted. On one hand, proponents argue that decriminalization can open up new avenues for mental health treatment and research. They believe that the therapeutic potential of these substances should not be overshadowed by their past stigmatization and criminalization.
However, critics raise concerns about the potential risks and consequences of widespread use and access to psychedelic substances. They worry about the impact on public safety, the potential for misuse or abuse, and the challenges of regulating their production and distribution. Furthermore, opponents highlight the contradiction between efforts to discourage the use of harmful substances like cigarettes while advocating for the legalization of substances that may also pose risks to public health.
As Governor Newsom considers whether to sign or veto Senate Bill 58, it is crucial to weigh the potential benefits and risks of decriminalizing psychedelic substances. The decision should be informed by a thorough examination of the scientific evidence, public health considerations, and input from various stakeholders, including law enforcement, drug prevention experts, and individuals with lived experiences.
Regardless of the outcome, this debate underscores the ongoing discussions and shifts in attitudes towards drug policy and mental health treatment. It brings to the forefront important questions about balancing individual freedoms, public safety, and the well-being of society as a whole.
The passage or rejection of Senate Bill 58 in California will undoubtedly have broader implications for drug policy and mental health treatment nationwide. It will be interesting to see how this debate unfolds and what impact it may have on future discussions surrounding the decriminalization and regulation of psychedelic substances.
Now loading...