POLITICS, PUNISHMENT, AND POPULISM by Lord Windlesham. Oxford:

Oxford University Press, 1998. 278 pages. Cloth $35.00. ISBN

0-19-511530-9.

Reviewed by John Blakeman, Department of Political Science,

Baylor University. E-Mail: John_Blakeman@baylor.edu.

Crime rates in the United States are falling, almost

dramatically so. Crime is no longer the main issue dominating

the national political agenda, yet for most of the 1990s crime,

and governmental responses to it, occupied much of our political

debate. Lord Windlesham's new book investigates part of that

political debate-the debate over federal crime legislation in

the 103rd and 104th Congress. At the outset it is worth noting

that Windlesham is an English academic who has spent much time

at academic institutions in the United States. His knowledge and

understanding of the American political process, especially

concerning Congress, is very good.

Windlesham notes in his preface that "like others before me

[Tocqueville?], I came from outside to study the penal system

and ended with some wider impressions of the workings of

government in America." (v). Readers should be immediately

skeptical of any scholar's ability to generalize about the

larger workings of American institutions from penal policy (or

the lack thereof); yet, the book Windlesham presents is not

about his generalizations on American politics. It is, instead,

a "narrative account of the policies on crime enacted by the

103rd and 104th Congresses, and a discussion of the influences

that determined them." (vi). He especially focuses on the

impact and influence of popular opinion and interest groups on

the making of criminal justice policy at the federal level.

Windlesham starts by noting the rise of neopopulist forces at

all levels of the political process in the United States, one

consequence of which is "an attraction towards simplistic

solutions to complex problems."(4) It is within the context of

neopopulism, and its political emphasis on simple solutions,

that he discusses the development of criminal justice

legislation. Moreover, Windlesham pays careful attention to the

impact of public opinion, "populist rhetoric," and legislative

compromise surrounding the attempts of the 103rd Congress to pass

an omnibus crime bill.

The book focuses on several pieces of legislation: the

Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act; Megan's Law; the

Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act; and the Prison

Litigation Reform Act. Along the way, Windlesham tackles some

very difficult policy issues, such as gun control (and the ban

on assault weapons), Congressional limits on federal habeas

corpus relief for prisoners, the federalization of crime,

registration for sex offenders, and community policing. No one

policy is dealt with in depth, but instead the book paints a

broader picture of the many influences and compromises affecting

the lawmaking process.

Take, for example, his focus on interest groups in the

political system. Windlesham focuses more on the issue of gun

control than on any other, and he spends significant time

discussing the role of the National Rifle Association (NRA) as an interest group in the process. He notes

the political strength of the NRA, especially during election

times. Yet, Windlesham also notes the increasing strength of

Sarah and Jim Brady's Handgun Control Incorporated (HCI). In

fact, Windlesham notes that although the NRA emerged during the

Reagan Administration as a very powerful lobby, by the mid-1990s

HCI had emerged as an effective counter. Professional groups,

such as the Fraternal Order of Police, as well as political

groups, such as the Congressional Black Caucus, are also

included for analysis, and Windlesham does a good job at

demonstrating how groups interact, and counter, each other in

the legislative process.

Other issues are tackled in the book as well. For instance,

his discussion on the development of "three strikes" laws (three

felony convictions results in mandatory 25 years to life

imprisonment) is well informed, and he focuses on federal and

state concerns. Windlesham notes that three strikes laws have

relative little impact at the federal level, but were (and are)

very costly at the state level. In a discussion of California's

three strikes law, which proved to be very costly in terms of

money and resources, he notes that "often unintended effects

elsewhere in the criminal justice system follow hard on the

heels of the implementation of populist-inspired legislation."

Indeed, Windlesham concludes his narrative by noting that "of

all the lessons to be drawn in analyzing the 1994 crime

legislation and the lesser measures that followed it in the 104th

Congress, at the top of the list is the way in which so many of

the provisions that found their way into law derived from the

perceived demands of local, sectional, or national public

opinion rather than the verdict of practical experience, or of

any detectable body of coherent principle."(222)

POLITICS, PUNISHMENT, AND POPULISM is a good investigation of

how Congress makes criminal legislation. It is an in-depth,

focused look at the interplay between interest groups, members

of Congress, the federal government and the states, and the

relationship between legislators, judges, and presidents.

Yet, a few criticisms can be leveled at the work as a whole.

The book emphasizes the influence of "populism" on the

legislative process, especially when it comes to criminal

justice legislation. That Congress created much criminal

justice policy in response to public demands for "three-strikes"

laws, sexual predator laws, or mandatory sentencing, is not

surpassing. Indeed, Windlesham does a good job at demonstrating

the populist threads, in terms of political rhetoric, running

through congressional debate on crime. However, the book is

generally bereft of detailed polling data that proves the

populist undercurrents of federal crime laws. While Windlesham

appropriately uses statistics on crime in the United States

throughout the book, and also recognizes the shortcomings of

such statistics, the "populism" part of his analysis could be

bolstered by more use of public opinion data.

Federalism issues, while tangentially addressed, could be

better developed as well. Considering that Congress has

"federalized" more aspects of the criminal justice system,

concerns about the balance of power between the states and

federal government are important. Windlesham does a good job of

discussing how interest groups interact at the national level

here, but one overriding question is where were the states in

all of this? That is, what role did the states play, if any, in influencing

legislation that would affect their criminal justice systems?

One last point-which really isn't a criticism-is that more

comparative data Page 39 follows and discussion would add an extra dimension to the book. While

recognizing that Windlesham did NOT set out to write a

comparative work on criminal justice policy, discussing how

other national legislatures and interest groups make similar

policy would put the U.S. Congress in another perspective.

Don't misunderstand-Windlesham's discussion of the making of

federal policy in the United States is very good, comprehensive,

and thought provoking. Asking for a comparative dimension

reflects this reviewer's bias, to a large degree.

Where does the book fit in, in terms of teaching? The book is

suitable for undergraduate and graduate courses on criminal

justice, public policy, and Congress. It is easy for

undergraduates to comprehend, and detailed and challenging

enough for more demanding graduate courses. In fact, parts of

the book could also be used in courses that study political

behavior and/or interest groups. It probably would not fit in

with a typical constitutional law course on civil liberties that

centers around legal cases, although the parts that discuss

federal habeas corpus and prison litigation reform can add depth

to the study of civil liberties cases.

POLITICS, PUNISHMENT, AND POPULISM is an in-depth narrative of

the making of some of the most important pieces of federal crime

policy. By focusing only on the 103rd and 104th Congresses,

Windlesham is able to offer a detailed account of the various

forces working for, and against, criminal justice legislation.

It is well researched, authoritative, and well written. Perhaps

most importantly, it is very thought provoking, and raises many

questions not only about the making of federal criminal justice

legislation, but also the impact of federal laws on crime in the

United States.

****************************************************************

Readers may redistribute this article to other individuals for

non commercial use, provided that the text and this notice remain

intact and unaltered in any way. This article may not be resold,

reprinted, or redistributed for compensation of any kind without

prior permission from the author. If you have any questions

about permissions, please contact C. Neal Tate, Editor, THE LAW

AND POLITICS BOOK REVIEW (ntate@unt.edu), Toulouse School of

Graduate Studies, University of North Texas, Denton, TX 76203-5459

or by phone at (940) 565-3946 or (940) 369-7486 (fax).

****************************************************************