PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Returned to the Calendar. Calendar No. 342. (consideration: CR S9510)
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Apr 23, 1998
Border Improvement and Immigration Act of 1998 - Amends the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 with respect to the automated entry-exit control system to exempt from required recordkeeping: (1) land border crossings; and (2) permanent resident and certain other aliens. (Sec. 3) Requires the Attorney General to report: (1) on the feasibility of implementing an automated entry-exit control system that would include land border arrivals and departures; and (2) annually on the development status of the automated entry-exit control system, and on visa overstays identified through such system. Requires integration of overstay information into Department of State and Immigration and Naturalization Service databases. (Sec. 5) Establishes a maximum $45 tourist or business visitor visa fee for an alien who is 18 years or older (free if under such age) who will be in the United States for less than 72 hours and will not travel more than 25 miles from the United States-Mexico border. Amends the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to extend from three years to four years the deadline prohibiting an alien using a border crossing identification card that does not contain a biometric identifier (such as a fingerprint). Requires tourist and business visitor visas to continue to be processed at least until October 1, 2000, in the Mexican border cities of Nogales, Nuevo Laredo, Ciudad Acuna, Piedras Negras, Agua Prieta, and Reynosa. (Sec. 6) Authorizes additional appropriations beginning in FY 1999 for northern and southwestern land border Immigration and Naturalization Service control and enforcement activities. (Sec. 7) Expresses the sense of the Senate that the Customs Service should be granted similar additional authorization of appropriations for border control and enforcement activities.
People & committees
Sen. Abraham, Spencer [R-MI] · R–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Returned to the Calendar. Calendar No. 342. (consideration: CR S9510)
Senate passed companion measure H.R. 2920 in lieu of this measure by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S9510)
Senate incorporated this measure in H.R. 2920 as an amendment.
The committee substitute as amended agreed to by Unanimous Consent.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S9506-9509)
By Senator Hatch from Committee on Judiciary filed written report. Report No. 105-197. Additional views filed.
By Senator Hatch from Committee on Judiciary filed written report. Report No. 105-197. Additional views filed.
Committee on Judiciary. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 342.
Committee on Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Subcommittee on Immigration. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 105-442.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S11678-11680)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 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 S.1360 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 S.1360 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 S.1360 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 S.1360 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.