PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jun 18, 2008
Biometric Enhancement for Airport-Risk Reduction Act of 2008 - Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security (Transportation Security Administration (TSA)), to: (1) study and report to Congress on how airports can transition to uniform, standards-based, and interoperable biometric identifier systems for airport workers with unescorted access to secure or sterile areas of an airport; and (2) conduct a risk-based analysis of selected Category X and I airports and other airports to identify where implementation of such systems could benefit them.
Defines "biometric identifier system" as a system that uses biometric identifier information to match and confirm identity of individuals for purposes of transportation security.
Requires the Secretary to convene a working group to assist with issues pertaining to implementing this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2] · D–MS
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5496)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H5496)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5982.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5496-5498)
Mr. Thompson (MS) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 432.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 110-688.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 110-688.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E841)
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: Sep 8, 2026. 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.5982 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.5982 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.5982 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.5982 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.