Like a horse on crack-cocaine, though, this book stars with gallant speed, slows down fast and ends with an mild gasp. I'm sure this was not the authors intention. There are two main reasons. First, as the book is structured so that each chapter examines another area of admin. state rule making (oversight from the 3 branches, rulemaking structure, inherent paradoxes of the process) the first two chapters, which are almost overviews of the rest of the book, builds up high expectations. For example, when the first chapter lightly nibbles at rulemaking's structural issues, tow paragraphs in we are told that we will need to wait untill another chapter for a discussion. The author does this repeatedly throughout the book, thus leaving the reader in a constant hang.

The second reason for the flickering finish of the book is that, and unfortunately as with most admin. state books, not much save for completely varied anecdotal information is offered. How are rules written, the book asks; it depends on the administration, it answers. What about modes of public participation and debate? Depends on the rules of the comission. After a while, its almost pointless to read the next chapter as we begin to guess the answer to each question posed.

The reason, though, for the three stars is this: Chapter 1 (on justifications for the admin. state), Chapter 3(paradoxes inherent in the rulemaking process) and Chapter 7 (the role of theory in rulemaking and its reform) are actually decent and informative chapters. Vagueness aside, they do provide useful anecdotes. Also Chapters 3 and 7 present ideas, discussions and points that are all but ignored in other books on admin. state rulemaking. Buy the book, read those 3 chapters and maybe skim the rest.