PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 4, 2017
Finish the Fence Act of 2017
This bill amends the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 with respect to construction of border fencing and road improvements to direct the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to complete the required 700-mile southwest border fencing by December 31, 2017.
The Secure Fence Act of 2006 is amended to direct DHS, in consultation with state and local officials along the U.S.-Mexico border, to achieve operational control over U.S. international land and maritime borders by December 31, 2017.
People & committees
Rep. Ross, Dennis A. [R-FL-15] · R–FL
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 Border and Maritime Security.
Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.278 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.278 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.278 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.278 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.