These changes were to encompass those holding a B-2 Visitors Visa as well as those wishing to study in the U.S. with a student visa. Under the suggested regulations, the minimum admission period of B-2 visitors for pleasure would be eliminated and the current maximum admission period of B-1 and B-2 visitors would reduce from one year to six months.

As has always been the case, the border official would be the one making the determination as to who could cross the border ­ and for how long. "Under this proposed rule, both B-1 visitors for business and B-2 visitors for pleasure will be granted a period of admission that accurately comports with the stated purpose of the visit...The burden is on the arriving alien to adequately explain to the inspecting service officer the precise nature of the visit so the service officer can make a determination on the period of stay to be granted."¹

The provision stating that, "Where there is any ambiguity whether a shorter or longer period of admission would be fair and reasonable under the circumstances, a B-1 or B-2 non-immigrant should be admitted for a period of 30 days,"² truly caught the attention of the CSA.

In essence a traveller, when approaching the border, would state the length of time desired for, and the purpose of, the trip. Only those who owned property in the U.S. and occupied it on a seasonal basis had grounds for an extension. RVers and renters would have no recourse. The official could give permission for the time asked, or just for a stipulated length of time, 30 days or longer. In this case, if it were less than asked for, the traveller could request an extension in writing while he/she was in the U.S. Border guards would have full power to assess the length of the trip, and it would depend entirely on their judgement.

There were a number of ambiguous points at work. Canadian citizens do not need a 'paper' visa to cross the border. Historically, however, border officials have used the same criteria that is used for B-2 visitors, namely that being a person having a residence in Canada, which he or she has no intention of abandoning, is visiting the United States temporarily for pleasure and has the finances to provide for the duration of the stay.

The CSA immediately contacted the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT). On April 19, they outlined their understanding of the situation at that point in time: Canadians did not require a visa for temporary visits and the INS had promised the Canadian Embassy in Washington that a memo to that effect would be distributed to border officials.

A memorandum ­ especially one not for public viewing ­ was not sufficient for the CSA. It was expected that in case of conflict, an officer would look to the regulations for back-up, but this would be at the discretion of the agent. As there was nothing in the proposed regulations specifically stating that Canadian citizens would be exempted, the CSA proceeded to plan a method of alleviating this situation.

An initial letter was sent to the INS with copies to sun belt governors, chambers of commerce, tourism bureaus and departments of economic development, highlighting the economic impact of snowbirds on their winter communities. Next, a phone blitz ensued. Surprisingly, our letter was the first that many had heard of the proposed regulations.

The second contact with the INS came in the form of a letter written by the CSA's legal counsel, Wallace Weylie, who is a highly respected U.S. immigration lawyer. The letter provided background information and a suggested wording to clarify the status of Canadians with regard to the proposed regulation. Again, this letter was copied to those most affected by the loss of the snowbird tourism dollar.

Media releases were sent across Canada and the United States ­ with very different messaging. To Canadian media, we spoke of being optimistic that the changes would not affect Canadians. To the Americans, we spoke about the economic impact of snowbirds on their winter communities ­ and how a loss of snowbird tourism would adversely affect their sun belt states.

Finally, a third piece of correspondence was prepared strictly for those we had been copying ­ giving them a summation of the CSA's objectives.

The results were electrifying. The Canadian Snowbird Association received phone calls and letters of support. Governor Jeb Bush's office answered the call first with a letter to the INS highlighting Florida's concern about losing international travellers. His letter was followed by support from Ft. Lauderdale's mayor, the Honorable Jim Naugle. The California Chamber of Commerce jumped into the fray, as did the Texas Department of Economic Development. Texas Governor Rick Perry made some well-directed phone calls on our behalf. Florida Senator Bob Graham summed it up best in his letter to the INS: "A bona fide winter resident of Florida will not be a security threat by staying in our state for five months. A bona fide terrorist has the potential to be a security threat by staying in our state for even a few hours."

Renowned news show, 60 Minutes, was set to air a story at the end of April about a possible Al-Qaeda connection in Canada. With just two weeks to go before the INS' public debate deadline, the CSA was fearful that this program would sway not-yet-defined opinion away from Canadian tourists. A letter was sent to the producer explaining our positioning and concerns. Although the show proceeded as scheduled, the producer did call President Ellen White prior to the show's airing, but it appeared to have little effect on the situation

In mid-May, an INS spokesperson confirmed in numerous newspaper articles that these new regulations would, in fact, affect Canadians. Privately, the same spokesperson assured the CSA that Canadians deemed admissible to the United States would have no problem with their winter plans. He claimed that any 30-day maximum handed out would be very much the exception, not the rule. By the middle of May, the Canadian Snowbird Association's concerns had been raised to such importance that the matter was brought to the international trade table. Reporters attending the trade talks in Buffalo, New York, called the CSA to inquire as to which questions we would like answered. At this meeting, Deputy Prime Minister John Manley received assurances from U.S. director of Homeland Security, Tom Ridge, that Canadians would be exempt from the proposed regulation. While many believed the issue to be settled, there was still one stumbling block ­ no paperwork.

On June 18, the CSA received a call from our Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) inviting President Ellen White and executive director Heather Nicolson-Morrison to testify before the House Small Business Committee in Washington the next day. This committee was examining the potential impact of the proposed INS regulations.

The following morning, Ellen White took her seat among the other presenters on Capitol Hill. Governor Jeb Bush was to testify by video. Dr. Pamella Dana, director of the Florida Office of Tourism, Trade and Economic Development introduced his testimony, citing the Canadian Snowbird Association as the organization bringing the matter to their attention.

Due to Ellen White's tenacity during a final question-and-answer period, the chairman of the committee, Rep. Donald Manzullo directed INS chairman James Ziglar to prepare, with the CSA's input, a letter stating that Canadians who were eligible to cross into the United States were exempt from the legislation.

An aftermath to this appearance was a requested visit to the Ontario legislature. The Minister of Immigration and Senior Affairs, the Honourable Carl DeFaria, introduced Ellen White and Heather Nicolson-Morrison to those in the legislature. In his introduction, he stated that the CSA had been sent to Washington and that "these impressive ladies" were to be recognized and applauded for their efforts on behalf of Canadian travellers.

A first draft of the INS letter was sent to CSA offices for approval, and it was found to be vague in its wording. With assistance from our legal counsel, we rewrote the document and a section was added to provide for the issuance of "clarifying guidance to our inspectors for dealing with Canadians crossing the border." The INS agreed to our changes.

Whereas we were earlier told that any internal documents were not for public viewing, we have since been told that the INS will share this document with the CSA.

The Canadian Snowbird Association views this letter as having won a battle ­ but the war has yet to be won. We will continue our efforts to have the status of Canadians clarified in the regulation and to have border inspectors receive clear and concise guidelines regarding our members' admission into the United States. This letter from INS Chairman, James Ziglar, is a powerful stop-gap measure to clarify the treatment of Canadian travellers at border-crossing points ­ the CSA is, however, continuing our efforts to have the permanent wording enshrined in the legislation to ensure that our future winter plans cannot be thrown into disarray at the whim of an inspecting officer.

Chairman Ziglar has recently announced he will be stepping done from the INS chairmanship by the end of this year. It will also be interesting to watch the interaction of the INS with the US Department of Homeland Security over the next few months. Our odyssey is not yet over! 

The actual text of both Florida Governor Bush's letter of support and Chairman Ziglar's letter are found on the following pages.