THE DEVELOPMENT OF ARTICLE 230 OF THE STATE'S PENAL CODE, WHICH DEFINES THE CRIMES OF PROSTITUTION AND PATRONIZING A PROSTITUTE, IS DIVIDED INTO FIVE PHASES: WRITING OF THE PROPOSED PENAL LAW BY THE PENAL LAW AND CRIMINAL CODE REVISION COMMISSION; INTRODUCTION OF THE PROPOSED LAW AS A STUDY BILL IN THE NEW YORK STATE LEGISLATURE, PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE PROPOSED LAW, AND THE COMMISSION'S SUBSEQUENT REWRITING OF THE LAW; ENACTMENT OF THE REWRITTEN LAW BY THE LEGISLATURE; ENFORCEMENT OF AND PUBLIC REACTION TO THE LAW; AND PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE LAW. THE REVIEW SHOWS THAT NUMEROUS INTEREST GROUPS AND INDIVIDUALS WORKED DILIGENTLY TO HAVE THE LAW WRITTEN OR ENFORCED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR WISHES. POWER SHIFTED FROM ONE GROUP TO ANOTHER, WITH ONE GROUP FREQUENTLY EXERCISING POWER WITH RESPECT TO ONE SECTION OF THE LAW WHILE ANOTHER EXERCISED POWER OVER ANOTHER SECTION. IN THE FINAL STAGE OF THE LAW'S HISTORY, CIVIL LIBERTIES AND WELFARE GROUPS DOMINATED OVER BUSINESSMEN AND POLICE IN REGARD TO THE CLAUSE MAKING PROSTITUTION SUBJECT TO A MAXIMUM 15-DAY SENTENCE, WHILE POLICE AND BUSINESSMEN DOMINATED WITH RESPECT TO NONENFORCEMENT OF THE 'PATRON' CLAUSE. THE REVIEW SUGGESTS THAT LAWMAKING AND LAW ENFORCEMENT CANNOT BE UNDERSTOOD AS POLITICAL, TECHNICAL, OR VALUE-FREE PROCESSES. BEHAVIORS ARE NOT AUTOMATICALLY DEFINED AS CRIMINAL. IN THE NEW YORK CASE, THE FORMULATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROSTITUTION LAW WERE POLITICAL PROCESSES INVOLVING NUMEROUS EFFORTS ON THE PART OF A RELATIVELY FEW INTEREST GROUPS TO OBTAIN THE MEANS BY WHICH TO AFFECT THE BEHAVIOR OF OTHERS. THE PRIMARY BASES FOR THE INTEREST GROUPS' POWER APPEAR TO BE THE FOLLOWING: AWARENESS OF ACTIONS TAKEN AND TO BE TAKEN IN FORMING OR ENFORCING THE LAW; RECOGNITION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF THESE ACTIONS TO THE GROUP'S INTEREST; PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE OR EXPERTISE; PUBLIC SUPPORT; POLITICAL AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT BY ORGANIZED GROUPS; PERSONAL CHARISMA; AND ABILITY TO WITHHOLD NEEDED SUPPORT OR COOPERATION FROM A SIGNIFICANT ACTOR.