mr. chairman , i rise in opposition to this amendment . 
the asylum provisions in h.r. 418 are vitally important to protect our constituents from child molesters , rapists , murderers , and other criminals , as well as terrorists seeking asylum in our country . 
i believe that we must keep the asylum open and honest for those who have a good-faith claim to asylum . 
however , we must also protect our constituents from aliens who seek to abuse our asylum processes and do harm to our citizens . 
for instance , because he was free after applying for asylum , mir aimal kansi was able to murder two cia employees at cia headquarters . 
ramzi yousef took advantage of the freedom he gained by applying for asylum to mastermind the first world trade center attack which killed six and injured 1 , 000 in the amendment author 's district . 
the asylum provisions in h.r. 418 do not prevent aliens from seeking asylum . 
those who truly have been persecuted for religious or political grounds will be allowed to present their cases just as they are able to now . 
these provisions merely overturn ninth circuit court decisions saying that immigration judges can not use inconsistencies in an alien 's statement to determine if he or she is being untruthful . 
the bill also says that an asylum applicant may be asked to corroborate his claim with evidence , if such evidence can be obtained without leaving the united states . 
one of the goals of this bill is to ensure that our asylum system is consistent with our judicial system . 
if a judge or criminal jury can sentence a criminal defendant to life in prison or even execution because they did not believe the defendant 's story , certainly an immigration judge can deny an asylum claim to an alien for the same basis . 
when an american goes to court to settle a dispute , he bears the burden of proof to prove his claim . 
requiring the asylum claimant to bear the burden of proof is consistent , both with our justice system and with international law . 
permitting the judge to require an asylum claimant to produce corroborating evidence he has or can obtain without leaving the united states is just common sense . 
if a claimant says , for example , that he fled his country because he received a threatening letter from a government official , the judge would be remiss if he failed to ask to see the letter or at least inquire about what happened to the letter . 
the asylum protections in the real id act are vitally important to ensuring the honesty of the asylum system , as well as the security of our nation and its citizens . 
i urge my colleagues to support the underlying bill , h.r. 418 , and oppose this amendment . 
