PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 9, 1995
Lorton Correctional Complex Closure Act - Transfers the Lorton Correctional Complex to the Administrator of General Services (within six years) for disposal in accordance with an implementation plan for the closure of the Complex. Prohibits the establishment of any future District of Columbia (DC) prison facility in Virginia without the approval of the Governor of Virginia. Directs that any DC felon (excluding any individual convicted of a misdemeanor, as a juvenile offender, or any person detained pending trial in DC Superior Court) who is committed to the custody of the Attorney General for a term of imprisonment on or after the enactment date of this Act be incarcerated in a facility designated by the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, in accordance with such rules as the Attorney General may establish to assure that the treatment of such felons is similar to that of others under the control of the Director. Sets forth transition provisions. Requires the Administrator to submit to the Congress an implementation plan for the closure of the Complex which shall identify actions with respect to the future use of the land on which the Complex is located and other specified issues. Establishes a Commission on Closure of the Lorton Correctional Complex. Sets forth provisions regarding: (1) a process for submission of the final implementation plan; (2) review of the Commission's proposal; (3) comments by the Commission and its members on the plan to the Administrator; (4) submission of a final plan; (5) automatic implementation of the plan; (6) membership, terms, vacancies, compensation, powers, and termination of the Commission; and (7) staff, experts, and consultants to the Commission. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Wolf, Frank R. [R-VA-10] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Referred to the Subcommittee on District of Columbia.
Referred to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E59-60)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 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.461 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.461 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.461 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.461 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.