PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 13, 2010
Inmate Work, Education, and Responsibility Curriculum Act of 2009 (sic) or the I-WERC Act - Directs the Attorney General to establish a three-year pilot program for making competitive grants to state, tribal, and local corrections agencies to fund a 40-hour work week curriculum of self-improvement activities for inmates that promote responsibility, education, family, work, and parenthood. Includes among the required uses of grant funds working toward and acquiring a general equivalency diploma, literacy training, vocational training and education, jobs and skills training, and mentoring sessions.
Requires curriculum participants to undergo an assessment of their mental, physical, intellectual, and vocational abilities. Extends incentives to inmates for participation in the program, including good time credit, monetary compensation, additional and more flexible visitation rights, and letters of recommendation.
Authorizes the Attorney General to award a grant to the National Institute of Justice to design and conduct a study of the curriculums funded by this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Weiner, Anthony D. [D-NY-9] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4458 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4458 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4458 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4458 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.