PSA's Sunday Sound-Off: December 7th, 2025

WHY THE CAMPAIGN FELL SHORT

Part 5: The Campaign Exaggerated the Risks of its Proposal Through Disorganized and Misleading Messaging In Contradiction to its Own Polling

An Early Capitulation

During a recorded panel in December 2024 (complete, rough AI transcript here), Yes on 4 campaign director Jared Moffat identified the attorney general’s office summary of the ballot question—a short description of the ballot question included on the ballot and in the state’s official voter guide—as the single “biggest” contributor to Question 4’s defeat:

And I think in our case, what, um, again, a lot of things, I think, you know, kind of went wrong or weren't, um, that led, that contributed to [Question 4] not passing. But I think, you know, the biggest one is that ballot summary that I mentioned earlier. Um, you know, the attorney general—again, in each state it's different—but the attorney general writes a summary of what the ballot initiative does. And I think that that ballot summary was not helpful. I think when voters read that summary, I think they, um, they, they concluded, a lot of those middle voters, concluded that they weren't in support. […] If you go and look at the Colorado ballot measure that passed in 2022 and you read the ballot summary that voters, um, considered before they voted, it's very, very different from what appeared on the ballot in Massachusetts. 

What Moffat did not mention was that—despite knowledge the ballot summary was confusing and polled “very badly” as early as fall 2023—the campaign had chosen not to sue for more favorable language, even though suing is standard practice in Massachusetts and across the country under such circumstances. 

Excerpt from text thread on the attorney general’s office summary

The campaign’s strategic leadership was well aware confused voters tend to default to rejecting proposals and, in the words of Question 4 campaign consultant Conor Yunits during a 2024 podcast (complete, rough AI transcript here): “Generally speaking, people only need one reason to vote no [on a ballot proposal].” This understanding appeared to inform the campaign’s officially preferred characterization of Question 4—as reflected in the excerpt from official campaign literature below—which boiled down to: legalizing regulated, on-site-only psychedelic therapy and decriminalizing personal use of certain therapeutic psychedelics.

The discrepancies between this campaign-favored description and the summary from the attorney general’s office (excerpt available here) were vast.

While the campaign’s description led with the legalization of “psychedelic-assisted therapy,” the attorney general’s office summary did not even contain the word “therapy.” In fact, the summary made no reference to therapeutic or medicinal intent at all, despite the full text of the ballot question being unequivocal regarding the proposal’s therapeutic motive and packed with references to “therapy” (word used 15 times).

Rather, in the absence of any reference to therapy, mandatory preparation and integration, potential health benefits, or safety pre-screening, the attorney general’s office summary indicated that legally purchasing and using psychedelics under the initiative’s framework would be as easy as buying and consuming an alcoholic beverage at a bar. The summary claimed approving the initiative would mean “[psychedelics] could be purchased at an approved location for use under the supervision of a licensed facilitator,” but it did not explain what this meant. The summary did not provide descriptions of “an approved location,” “use under the supervision,” and “a licensed facilitator.” Moreover, the summary did not mention any requirement for legally purchasing psychedelics “at an approved location” other than being 21 or older. Further muddying the waters, the summary paired the sentence about purchasing psychedelics for use under supervision with a claim the initiative “would otherwise prohibit any retail sale of natural psychedelic substances” (emphasis in italics mine), implying the sale of psychedelics at “approved” locations would be a kind of retail sale, akin to purchasing a beer at a restaurant for on-site consumption.

In addition to mischaracterizing Question 4’s legalization framework, the attorney general’s office summary led with one of the most polarizing elements of the proposal—“[allowing] persons aged 21 and older to grow […] certain natural psychedelic substances”—and framed the proposal’s decriminalization provisions as “[allowing]” and “[authorizing]” expansive personal use rather than as “removing criminal penalties for limited personal use” as in the text of the law. This framing obscured Question 4’s criminal justice reform element (decriminalization), which internal polling had suggested was relatively popular, as evidenced by an excerpt from June 2023 survey results.

Join PSA Founder Jack Gorsline and Fireside Project Executive Director Joshua White LIVE on Thursday, December 11 for a special edition of the Psychedelic State(s) of America Advocacy Spotlight Initiative - an interview with “Lucy” the world’s first-ever “AI Psychedelic Patient”

Streaming LIVE on on Youtube, LinkedIn, Facebook, Substack, and more via Psychedelic State(s) of America, Psychedelics Today, and DoubleBlind Magazine!

Thursday, December 11 @ 3:30 PM EST / 12:30 PM PST

Ready to reconnect with your psychedelic community?

Join us on December 18 for Writing the Psychedelic Future, a special edition of the Psychedelic Professionals Networking Club - powered by Psychedelic State(s) of America and the Psychedelic Writers Guild

Expect connection, inspiration, and high-vibe networking as we bring together leading voices in psychedelic writing with the professionals shaping our field.

Featuring Jack Gorsline (Founder of The PWG and PSA), Mary Carreon (Editor in Chief, DoubleBlind Magazine), Noah Daly (PWG/PSA Chief of Operations), in an evening guided by Carly Dutch-Greene (Studiodelic) focused on connection and the stories shaping today’s psychedelic landscape.

Format: Fireside Chat → Q&A → Networking Rooms (PPNC Style)

Topics: We will explore how psychedelic stories are created and shared, key media trends, responsible use of AI, and the simple path from idea to publication.

Not a writer? No problem! This gathering is for anyone curious about media, messaging, and the narratives driving the psychedelic movement. You will still get the ease and meaningful connection that define every PPNC event.

Thursday, December 18 @ 4pm PST / 7pm EST

Until next time,

The Psychedelic State(s) of America Team