Prison expansion is being driven by the notion that criminals are morally inferior and that they respond only to the threat of serious punishment. These assumptions are simplistic and socially divisive. Furthermore, incarceration is expensive and fails to deal effectively with the fact that most criminals are returned to society. The general public is increasingly accepting the idea that there are two distinct classes of people in the United States: (1) decent people; and (2) criminals and other worthless types. An examination of the intake populations of several prisons revealed the fallacy of this kind of thinking. It showed that the majority of those entering prisons were different from the popular image. They were petty offenders who had been convicted of petty felonies. Their offenses involved no weapons, no injury, no significant amount of money, and no drugs. Because it is so expensive to incarcerate so many people, little money is left to provide useful and effective programming for those who are imprisoned. When the petty offenders are released from prison, they are less able to adjust to society than when they entered prison. Effective rehabilitation can return to the prison regime only with a reduction in the prison population. There are two promising methods for reducing prison population. The first is to eliminate laws that result in hundreds of thousands of relatively harmless people being sent to prison. Drug laws are a good starting point. The second method is to dispense shorter sentences for all but serious felonies, such as those that involve violence. The money saved by decreases in prison populations through the shortening of sentences would make available funds for inmate rehabilitation, support for aftercare, and the funding of other measures to reduce the size of the underclass. 3 references