Temporary Protected StatusAs FAIR executive director Dan Stein noted in congessional testimony on March 4, 1999, "Our laws should not reward illegal immigrants to the United States regardless of the political or natural upheavals in their homelands. Otherwise, experience shows that we will encourage further illegal immigration. By now, we should have learned from experience that TPS is misnamed -- what we offer as "temporary" protection is most often seen by the aliens residing illegally in the United States as a foot in the door to legal permanent residence. They are happy to accept our offer of humanitarian concern, but they have no intention of departing the United States when TPS status expires. In 1990 the United States adopted a law that provides temporary protection in the United States for non-resident foreigners who wish to avoid returning to their homeland because of civil strife or effects of a natural disaster of "extraordinary and temporary conditions." The people who were to benefit from this Temporary Protected Status (TPS) were people who were not seeking permanent residence based on asylum for those fearing persecution in their homeland. Students or visitors whose visas were expiring were spared from seeking a visa extension by this provision. However, the true beneficiaries of TPS were not temporary visitors, but rather people who had entered the United States illegally. This was clear from the outset, when Congress, in adopting the measure, specified that people from El Salvador should be among the first beneficiaries. The Salvadorans, for the most part, had entered the country illegally. Not only did TPS spare illegal aliens from deportation, it provided them a quasi-legal status in the country and gave them work permits so that they could legally work. Distortions in the TPS ProgramClearly the test of whether the TPS program would work as intended, i.e., a temporary respite for persons who fear returning home because of temporary adverse conditions, is whether TPS status has been allowed to lapse when homeland conditions have stabilized and whether the protected populations have then left the United States to return home. By this standard, TPS has been an absolute failure. Practice has shown a pattern of unjustified extensions of TPS designations and demands for amnesty by the protected aliens so that they could stay permanently in the United States. An example of this distortion of the TPS program may be seen in the recent extension of the TPS status for Liberians. Attorney General Janet Reno found that conditions in Liberia no longer justified an extension of TPS. However, President Clinton in effect overruled that finding and again extended temporary protection for Liberians. He did not do so on the basis that the Liberians would face danger or unusual hardship if they had to return home. Rather, he justified his decision on the argument that if the United States were to force Liberians to return home, other nations, especially in West Africa, might adopt similar policies toward the Liberian expatriate communities living in their countries. This, the Administration reasoned, might be destabilizing to the current Liberian government. But, the basis for TPS was to protect individuals, not their governments. The Liberian example was not the first of the Clinton Administration heeding the concerns of foreign governments in deciding TPS designation. It had done so earlier when Central American countries asked that the United States not deport their nationals who had benefited from TPS, arguing that they did not have jobs available for the prospective returnees. Temporary Protected Status and AmnestiesThe interrelationship between the TPS status and amnesty for aliens residing illegally in the United States unfortunately is clear. That link was unmistakably established in the debate surrounding treatment of natives of El Salvador who were specifically designated for TPS status in the 1990 Immigration Act. These aliens, who for the most part entered the country illegally in the 1980s, and were granted legal temporary protection and work permits as a result of the TPS designation, never went home after political stability was reestablished in their homeland. The fact that they had been covered by TPS -- and later by Deferred Enforcement of Departure -- and during this period had put down roots, had acquired U.S.-born children, had been legally working and paying taxes was cited as sufficient reason that they should be given legal residence rather than forced to leave. We have since been subjected to an outright amnesty for Nicaraguans and Cubans and a quasi-amnesty for others that allows them to obtain residence on the basis of family hardship. In addition, there have been continued efforts to adopt a full-fledged amnesty for Haitians, Liberians, Portugese, and the other Central Americans who have benefited from TPS. It should be apparent from any close focus on the disparity between the intent of our policies and the practical effects that we can see, that this gap is undermining our immigration laws. Congress needs to correct the balance between compassionate policies and protecting the public against uninvited and unwanted illegal immigrants. The American public needs to be reassured that its compassion is not being taken advantage of by foreigners seeking greater economic opportunity through the opening of our hearts to victims of political or natural disasters. To end this cycle,
Temporary Protected Status (TPS) Beneficiary CountriesEl Salvador - Sept. 1990 (* applications still accepted) Updated 7/02 |
|
