Vol. 2 No. 11 (November, 1992) pp. 172-173

THE SEARCH FOR RATIONAL DRUG CONTROL, by Franklin M. Zimring and Gordon Hawkins. Cambridge University Press, 1992. 219 pp.

Reviewed by James A. Inciardi, Center for Drug and Alcohol Studies, University of Delaware.

The central thesis of THE SEARCH FOR RATIONAL DRUG CONTROL is that the drug policy process in the United States is permeated with ideology, impervious to the lessons of history, and addicted to debating polar abstractions, such as decriminalization, rather than focusing on practical alternatives to current policy. Given this stated backdrop, the authors -- Franklin M. Zimring and Gordon Hawkins, both of the Earl Warren Legal Institute at the University of California, Berkeley, and highly respected in their field -- state that the aim of their treatise is to improve the way in which government officials think, talk, and act in the area of drug control. They argue that a rational drug control policy depends on a sensible policy process, and they point to areas in which the current process is far from satisfactory. To accomplish their aim, the book's eight clearly-written chapters examine such diverse things as the White House's NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL STRATEGY, the definitions of drugs and addiction, prohibition and the lessons of history, the drug legalization/decriminalization debate, the relationships between illicit drug use and street crime, issues related to children and drugs, and the federal role in the policy process.

This work is genuine scholarship, and its prepublication endorsements and testimonials from respected scholars are both numerous and emphatic. Having said that, I would argue that it is highly unlikely that THE SEARCH FOR RATIONAL DRUG CONTROL will influence, no less be thoroughly read, by its intended audience. And further, while the authors clearly understand the policy-making process, it would appear that they have little understanding of the drug problem in America.

The book opens with a harsh critique of the first NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL STRATEGY, a document prepared by our nation's first "drug czar" and released in 1989. It is a justifiably disparaging review of the document, but the critique is presented in a manner that will serve only to annoy the very policy makers the authors hope to educate. More importantly, however, the authors attribute far too much importance to the first NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL STRATEGY. The document was published more than three years ago, when William Bennett was at the helm of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. Since then, the "strategy" report has undergone three alterations and modifications; its authorship has changed, and the agency from whence it came has lost its influence and importance in drug policy affairs. As such, a critique of the 1989 version of the NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL STRATEGY is anything but timely. Besides, the criticisms offered by Zimring and Hawkins have been heard before, over and over, in both the professional literature and the media for the last few years.

The major shortcoming of the work is that little appears in THE SEARCH FOR RATIONAL DRUG CONTROL that hasn't been said already. The discussions of "what is a drug?" and the definitions of "addiction" and "the drug problem" appear to be a throwback to social science deliberations of the 1960s, when academic sociologists split hairs over the differences between "drug abuse" and "illicit drug use." Although the exchanges were interesting, they were (and remain) of little theoretical or practical value. Other discussions in THE SEARCH FOR RATIONAL DRUG CONTROL that already have appeared throughout the drug policy literature of the past half decade include the lessons of Prohibition, the elusive relationships between drug use and street crime, and John Stuart Mill's essay ON LIBERTY as it relates to the drug decriminalization/legalization debate. Shifting to an alternative point, there are numerous indications in this book that the authors have a limited understanding of the levels of human suffering associated with drug abuse, and the culture of hopelessness that leads so many inner city residents into careers in addiction. To

Page 173 follows:

cite an example, they quickly dismiss the argument that there is something "different" about crack-cocaine as a drug of abuse. Yet crack is different in many ways. It is an especially problematic drug because of its peculiar pharmacological and sociocultural effects. Briefly, because crack makes its users ecstatic and yet is so short-acting, it has an extremely high addiction potential. Use rapidly becomes compulsive use. Crack acquisition and use thus become enormously more important than family, work, social responsibility, health, values, modesty, morality, or self respect. The suffering associated with crack use, especially among women, is unprecedented in the annals of the American drug scene.

Given the tone of this review, one may find it strange that I agree with much of what the authors have to say. And if readers are wondering why I have been so critical of such an eloquently written book, it is because analyses of drug policy must transcend intellectual exercise to offer practical alternatives. This book meticulously takes us through how policy choices are identified, debated and selected, and offers a foundation for an improved policy-making process. But it goes no further. As such, it offers abstract models for a target audience (policy makers) that has been trained to deal in only the concrete and pragmatic.