The 1970 Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act replaced all previous drug laws, put drugs under federal control, and increased funding for prevention and treatment. It classified drugs into 5 schedules based on their medical use and abuse potential, and assigned penalties for illegal drug manufacture, distribution, and possession. The Act also established rules for prescribing physicians and has been amended several times since.

1. Chapter 3
Drug Products and
Their Regulations
© 2011 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved.

2. Comprehensive Drug Abuse
Prevention and Control Act of 1970
 Replaced or updated all previous laws
 Drugs controlled by the Act are under federal
jurisdiction
 Prevention and treatment funding increased
 Direct control of drugs, not control through
taxation, is the goal
 Enforcement separated from scientific and
medical decisions
© 2011 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved.

3. Comprehensive Drug Abuse
Prevention and Control Act of 1970
 Drug Schedules
 I – No medical use; high potential for abuse
 II – Medical use; high potential for abuse
 III – Medical use; moderate potential for abuse
 IV – Medical use; mild potential for abuse
 V – Medical use; low potential for abuse
 Penalties for illegal manufacture, distribution or
possession were assigned by category
 Rules for prescribing physicians
 Amendments
 1984
 1986
 1988
 2010
© 2011 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved.

4. Impact of Drug Enforcement
 Early enforcement
 Prison vs. rehabilitation
 Punishment seemed not to be working
 “Narcotic farms”
 Current issues
 Bureau of Narcotics (Treasury Department)
 “Drug Czar”
 Mandatory minimum sentences (1951)
 1956 Narcotic Drug Control Act toughened penalties
 DEA formed
 State vs. federal law
 Drug screening
© 2011 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved.

5. Impact of Drug
Enforcement
 Budget
 Other costs
 Cost of prison population
 Crimes committed to purchase drugs
 Corruption in law enforcement
 Conflicting international policy goals
 Loss of individual freedom
 Effectiveness of control?
© 2011 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved.