Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Health topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Finance panel recommends no action on medical psilocybin program amid fiscal and staffing concerns

House Finance Committee · March 17, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Division three recommended ITL on HB 1809 (a DHHS-administered medical psilocybin program) after DHHS testified the program would require new positions and startup funding (~$250,000) and the committee expressed concerns about funding, staffing and limited evidence; a minority proposal would keep an advisory board and delay implementation to 2027.

Division three’s members discussed HB 1809, which would authorize a medical psilocybin program administered by the Department of Health and Human Services and governed by an advisory board.

DHHS testimony said the department would need new staff (an administrator and a program manager) and an initial appropriation — the division’s estimate was roughly $250,000 in upfront costs and ongoing administrative expense thereafter. Committee members also noted that DHHS currently has many unfilled positions and is operating under budget constraints.

Some members emphasized emerging evidence that psilocybin-assisted therapy can help treatment-resistant depression and some PTSD patients, but others stressed that data remain limited and the substance is classified federally as a schedule I drug, which complicates research and program oversight.

After extended discussion the division recommended ITL (inexpedient to legislate) on a 13–11 vote. Committee members filed a minority report proposing an alternative approach: establish an advisory board and delay program implementation to July 1, 2027 so DHHS could plan and include potential costs in the regular budget process.

The committee asked for formal minority and majority reports to guide floor discussion; floor action is likely to address advisory-board structure, funding sources and whether pilot/research approaches are preferable to an immediate program authorization.