This is… Psychedelic State(s) of America
PSA Sunday Sound-Off: January 4th, 2026
The Rundown
6 Predictions for the Psychedelic Movement in 2026
Pharmaceutical pathway expansion, policy reform on every level at home and abroad, and significant restructuring by leading advocacy organization will make for a banner year on the psychedelic beat.
By Jack Gorsline
At least one psychedelic compound will be approved by the FDA for medical use - which is likely to be Compass Pathways’ patented crystaline polymorph psilocybin compound. However, according to our friends at Psychedelic Alpha, the Usona Institute’s psilocybin compound may be soon to follow thereafter, which could quell concerns from psychedelic advocates outside the biopharma sphere about Compass’ path (pun not intended but acknowledged) to a psychedelic monopoly for the foreseeable future.
As has been hinted at for years now, in 2026 the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS) will finally launch a new political advocacy-focused project of some kind - be it a new partner organization of MAPS’ own creation or a collaborative initiative with mission–aligned drug policy reform organizations in the US and abroad. Hint: Expect a formal announcement from MAPS by mid-February at the latest.
New Approach PAC will either rebrand or shut down entirely. As I reported last year, multiple sources with direct knowledge of leadership discussions have indicated that New Approach PAC - the nation’s largest political investor in drug policy reform - is soon to be a thing of the past. While some sources I’ve spoken to have claimed the PAC will be shut down entirely, others have hinted that a “rebrand on the sly” may be more likely. Notably, there have been whispers of a contentious fallout between high-dollar New Approach donors like TOMS Shoes Founder Blake Mycoskie and New Approach PAC Executive Director Graham Boyd, as well as Boyd and former New Approach Advocacy Fund Director Jared Moffat (seemingly in part due to Moffat’s central role in the Question 4 campaign finance scandal). While Boyd previously denied that New Approach is shutting down to Psychedelic Alpha last fall, at least one source - Third Wave Founder Paul F. Austin - has publicly stated that the PAC is in fact shutting down, but noted that the Q4 campaign’s demise is not to blame.
And speaking of the Yes on 4 Campaign Dumpster Fire - in 2026, the Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance will conclude their investigation (which according to sources at the MA OCPF is active and ongoing) into allegations of campaign finance violations committed by Q4 campaign leadership. Subsequently, expect the OCPF to issue substantial fines to one or more of the involved parties - New Approach PAC, political consulting shop Dewey Square Group, veteran advocacy organization Heroic Hearts Project, and/or the alleged New Approach PAC shell organization Open Circle Alliance.
At least one state-level psychedelic bill that isn’t an exclusively regulated therapeutic access framework will reach a Governor’s desk by year’s end. Whether or not there’s enough political and financial incentive for a Governor to sign such a bill into law in a midterm election year remains to be seen - but the bipartisan political momentum building behind two particularly innovative bills that are up for consideration in New York and Massachusetts respectively is certainly worth keeping an eye on.
The Mexican government will respond to the rapid influx in psychedelic tourism south of the border in a formal capacity that will have industry-disrupting implications. Whether that’s by way of significant law enforcement crackdown on certain clinics, legislative action that offers legal clarity to practitioners, clinic owners, and clients, or an increase in criminalization of psychedelic use by foreign nationals on Mexican soil remains to be seen - but Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum’s administration will wade into the murky waters of international psychedelic diplomacy before the the 2026 holiday season.
Who Should Control Psychedelics?
MAHA seems psychedelic friendly, investors and funders are returning, and more states are talking about legalizing. So who's going to control these substances? No one's asking, so I am...
From our Friend Joe Dolce at Modern Psychedelics
For progressives like me these are the dark days of doomerism. The country is being led by an obviously small-dicked authoritarian who seems to take perverse pleasure in denigrating immigrants, trans people, our European allies, and anyone else he can bully. It is disgusting and dispiriting to witness. Yet when it comes to psychedelics, I feel a surge of restrained optimism. It’s an odd dissonance, so let me explain.
Last August, the so-called psychedelic renaissance suffered a body blow when the FDA rejected the MAPS-led effort to approve MDMA assisted therapy for depression. That defeat was followed by a failed ballot initiative in Massachusetts to decriminalize psilocybin, DMT, mescaline and ibogaine. That one-two punch left advocates down for the count and in despair.
But this year, Colorado and New Mexico have joined Oregon in passing psychedelic legislation, and some three dozen psychedelic bills were introduced in over a dozen other states (you can see a state by state tracking map here.)
Add to that the formation of some surprising, unprecedented political alliances. While I vehemently disagree with Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s anti-vax positions and appalling attacks on trans health and gender affirming care, he has signaled support for psychedelic medicine, a position that is in part formed by his own positive LSD trips as a teenager and his more recent use of ibogaine for addiction. This is a big deal. (I also support his effort to get artificial dyes and chemicals out of food, but that’s another column). At the very least there is an opening – a welcome change from 60 years of bureaucratic calcification.
In parallel, conservative support for medical psychedelics has added a new wrinkle (and coalition) to the movement, which has traditionally been driven by lefties. Rick Perry, the self described “dark, knuckle-dragging, right wing,” Republican former guvna of Texas, has anointed himself as the “Johnny Appleseed” of clinical ibogaine. He told attendees at the 2025 Psychedelic Science conference that he “was dedicating his life to advocating for this medicine” and he pushed Texas governor Greg Abbott to allocate $50 million for clinical trials for veterans suffering from traumatic brain injury, PTSD and addiction. Perry has even travelled to Mexico for his own Ibogaine experience and released poast treatment cans of his brain, which showed some of his age-related deterioration ameliorated by the drug.
Then there’s Kyrsten Sinema, the thorn-in-the-side Dem turned independent senator from Arizona who has had her own psychedelic renaissance, also with ibogaine. (Conservatives like ibogaine because large doses it can trigger cardiac arrhythmias and death, which means it will require medical oversight). Like Perry, Sinema made her own pilgrimage to Mexico for treatment, which she described as unpleasant but it left her feeling “crystal-clear. Sharp, sharp is the word. My brain feels snappy.”
Sinema lobbied Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs (D) and got $5 million toward ibogaine research into the state’s budget. She also conferred with Doug Collins, the conservo ex-pastor from Georgia who now heads the Veterans Administration. Two years ago, he had never heard the term “psychedelic medicine.” After a few sit downs with Sinema, he’s now all in.
This surprising bipartisan support has reignited the fires of psychedelics as medicine. Donations to nonprofits are up. Investments, which had cratered, are again on the rise, as are the moods of leaders in the movement.
If the bulwark of the prohibition is, in fact, easing, the question of who will control these substances becomes ever more salient. I have randomly broached this topic with a variety of people over the last weeks and was met with either a shrug (“It’s so far away–let’s get the FDA to approve MDMA assisted therapy first“) or dismissal. (“No one should control them!”).
Yes, it’s a complicated question and far too nuanced for this single Substack post, but if we are on the precipice of change, someone or some bureaucracy is going to control/regulate use, especially if profit is involved. Those forces are already in motion, so it’s prudent to ask the question now to avoid being caught off guard when the moment occurs.
This is precisely why I invited Ethan Nadelmann to discuss the big picture issue with me. Ethan is a friend and colleague whom I greatly respect. As the former head of Drug Policy Alliance and one time consigliere to George Soros, he has wrestled with the notion of open societies and drug use throughout his very formidable 30+ year career.
Before we spoke I identified at least four groups of players who could act as psychedelic gatekeepers (there are more, including indigenous leaders, who deserve to be heard, but I’m keeping it simple).
The Medical Establishment. Medical access is crucial for people suffering from serious illnesses that traditional science has been unable to address. But legalization or decriminalization should also accommodate people who use psychedelics for other purposes – creative or spiritual exploration, peering into the vast recesses of consciousness, or even just a fun walk in the woods. I don’t want my use proscribed and prescribed by the healthcare system.
Interestingly, people like Perry and Sinema draw a line between “acceptable” medical use and “unacceptable” recreational use and have said so publicly.“In a conservative’s brain, psychedelics are not a drug,” Sinema told Politico. “They are a medicine. In the old-school left psychedelic movement, they’re seen as a drug. That drug has healing properties, but it also has other properties that they celebrate that are not just medicine.”
Big and baby pharma. Biopharma startups are already tinkering with psychedelics to create novel compounds that shorten or eliminate the trip in the name of efficiency. They’re aiming for the one-magic-pill-a-day model that will recoup their development costs and keep people buying their drugs for the rest of their lives. They’re trying to Prozactize psychedelics, which to my mind is far too restrictive.
Entheogenic churches/religious orgs. This is already happening and it’s an interesting model that allows for a lot of hyperlocal control. Oakland, CA has the Zide Door Church which dispenses psilocybin as a sacrament to “parishioners.” Ledgeway Sangha, is an Austin, TX “legal psychedelic church rooted in peer-to-peer healing, communal practice, and non-dogmatic love.” Its sacrament is 2C-B and its rituals are non-denominational. Psychedelic churches also have a historical antecedents that protect them legally. Santo Daime and UDV both legally use ayahuasca sacramentally; the Native American Church uses peyote, but I don’t see this as a systemic solution.
Community care. The loose network of underground therapists, shamans, medicine servers and guides has done a great job of keeping the ball rolling for the last 60 years. But there is no quality-control or accountability, which can prove problematic as access expands. This became blazingly clear when even sanctioned therapists in the MAPS MDMA trials were discovered abusing patients and initiating sexual relationships with them, a red flag in any therapeutic situation. It’s likely that some training will be made compulsory. Dr. Seth Mehr, who owns and operates Cascade Psychedelic Medince, a forward thinking ketamine clinic in Portland, OR, told me he took the state’s psychedelic training and found it surprisingly thorough. (I’ll be exploring that in a subsequent post).
It’s probable that some blend of healthcare and community care is going to run the show. Colorado’s Natural Medicine Program offers promise. It decriminalizes personal use and cultivation of magic mushrooms, ibogaine, DMT and mescaline (excluding peyote, which is controlled by the Native American Church ) and allows licensed and trained facilitators to administer psilocybin journeys.
But Ethan brought up another idea, one that he’s been noodling since 1991: An online, self-regulated marketplace – sort of like Silk Road-meets-Etsy – with a clever harm reduction component built in. His model blurs the boundaries between the categories mentioned above. Is it politically viable? Probably not, but it is, at the end of the day, imaginative (and very psychedelic) and exemplifies the type of blue sky thinking that policy makers should bear in mind.
The political headwinds are impossible to read, but along with the whiplashing disruption we’re weathering daily, openings do arise. This could be the opening the psychedelic world has been waiting for.
Editor’s Note: This article and interview were originally published by Modern Psychedelics on Substack. Be sure to support and subscribe here.
PSA Media NewsWire Highlights
PSA Media Newswire Highlights
High Times Magazine
From our friends at High Times Magazine:
By Steve Gelsi
Talking Drugs
From our Friends at Talking Drugs
By Niko Vorobyov
Until next time,
The Psychedelic State(s) of America Team