Hostname: page-component-6b989bf9dc-pkhfk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-14T20:08:59.761Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Never-Ending Drug War: Obstacles to Drug War Policy Termination

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2012

Renee Scherlen
Renee Scherlen
Affiliation:
Appalachian State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Why does the war on drugs continue after 40 years? This article combines theories of policy termination and prospect theory to explain the drug war's persistence. After reviewing the case for termination, the article turns to policy termination theory. As previous case studies have demonstrated, rationality and economic reasoning alone fail to persuade politicians to end existing policies. In the case of the drug war, specific characteristics of the drug policy and the current political environment, as well as typical institutional and bureaucratic constraints, create substantial obstacles to end the drug war. Perceptions of the risks and benefits of drug war termination also create difficulties. The article concludes that a number of factors need to shift before drug war policy termination can take place.

Type
Features
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 45 , Issue 1 , January 2012 , pp. 67 - 73
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Behn, Robert D. 1978. “Closing a Government Facility” Public Administration Review 38 (4): 332–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bothun, Douglas, and Comer, John C.. 1979. “The Politics of Termination: Concepts and Process” Policy Studies Journal 7(3): 540–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewer, Garry D. 1978. “Termination: Hard Choices-Harder Questions” Public Administration Review 38 (4): 338–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daniels, Mark R. 1997. Terminating Public Programs: An American Political Paradox. London: M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
DeLeon, Peter. 1987. “Policy Termination as a Political Phenomena.” In The Politics of Policy Evaluation, ed. Palumbo, Dennis J.. London: Sage.Google Scholar
DeLeon, Peter. 1983. “Policy Evaluation and Program Termination.” Policy Studies Review 2 (4): 631–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeLeon, Peter. 1978. “A Theory of Policy Termination.” In The Policy Cycle, eds. May, Judith V. and Wildavsky, Aaron B., 279–300. London: Sage.Google Scholar
“Excerpts from the President's Message on Drug Abuse Control.” 1971. New York Times, June 18, 22.Google Scholar
Frantz, Janet E. 1992. “Reviving and Revising a Termination Model” Policy Sciences 25: 175–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallup. 2007. Little Change in Public's View of the U.S. Drug Problem. http://www.gallup.com/poll/102061/little-change-publics-view-us-drug-problem.aspxGoogle Scholar
Geva-May, Iris. 2004. “Riding the Wave of Opportunity: Termination in Public Policy.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 14 (3): 309–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel, Knetsch, J., and Thaler, R.. 1991. “Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias” Journal of Economic Perspectives 5 (1): 193–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel, and Tversky, Amos. 1979. “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk Econometrica 47 (2): 263–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaufman, Herbert. 1976. Are Government Organizations Immortal? Washington, DC: Brookings.Google Scholar
Kerlikowske, Gil. 2009. “Q&A with the New Drug Czar” The Wall Street Journal, May 14.Google Scholar
Kirkpatrick, Susan E., Lester, James P., and Peterson, Mark R.. 1999. “The Policy Termination Process.” Policy Studies Review 16 (1): 210–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jervis, Robert. 1992. “Political Implications of Loss Aversion.” Political Psychology, Special Issue: Prospect Theory and Political Psychology 13 (2): 187–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nixon, Richard. 1971a. “Remarks about an Intensified Program for Drug Abuse Prevention and Control,” June 17, accessed via The American Presidency Project http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=3047&st=Drug+Abuse&st1=Google Scholar
Nixon, Richard. 1971b. “Special Message to the Congress on Drug Abuse Prevention and Control,” June 17, accessed via The American Presidency Project http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=3048&st=drug+abuse&st1=Google Scholar
Office of National Drug Control Policy. 1997–2010. The National Drug Control Strategy. http://ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/alphaList.aspx?alpha=NGoogle Scholar
Pacula, Rosalie. 2009. “Legalizing Marijuana: Issues to Consider before Reforming California State Law” Testimony Before the Committee on Public Safety, California State Assembly, October 28.Google Scholar
Reagan, Ronald. 1988. “Remarks at a Meeting of the White House Conference for a Drug Free America,” February 29, accessed via The American Presidency Project http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=35482&st=drug+war&st1=goalsGoogle Scholar
Reagan, Ronald. 1986. “Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions” Journal of Business 59 (4), Part 2, S251–78.Google Scholar
Welch, David A. 2005. Painful Choices: A Theory of Foreign Policy Change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, James Q. 1989. Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar