Lets talk about this department of justice 1033 program that allows for the distribution of surplus military equipment. It is a department of defense program. It is one of several Government Programs that provide equipment to Law Enforcement. Why was it put into place . Why did the department decide to get this equipment, free of charge, to local Police Departments . Did not decide, congress decided. Has said that the 1033 program does not further its mission. , when rampinged down from actions in the middle east, there was extra equipment, we use do something with it, they decided to pass it on to Law Enforcement. Ledescribed the events that up to the decision in 2014 by the Obama Administration to take a look at this program and revisit it. The Obama Administration did not look only at the 1033 program. Federaled at all Government Programs that provide equipment to Law Enforcement. The Obama Administration provided more than 82 billion to Law Enforcement for resources. Weref these programs inconsistently applied. They had different rules, different people operating them, and they were communicating. After the events in ferguson, which made everyone concerned with what they saw, the Obama Administration decided to take a ,ook at what is our footprint what is the federal governments footprint on what is happening . Saw number ofe problems across all of the programs. We decided to make sure that the federal government was applying appropriate equipment in a thoughtful manner according to a consistent governmentwide standard. That was the only purpose for the obama executive order. It did not deny any necessary equipment for Law Enforcement. We are talking with myesha braden. She is the acting director of the Civil Justice project at the Lawyers Committee for civil rights under law. We are talking about the policy of the Justice Department, the recently reinstated policy by the Trump Administration that allows surplus military equipment to be given to local Law Enforcement. Democrats can call 202 7488000 republicans, 202 7488001 202 7488002 if you are a member of Law Enforcement, please call 202 7488003. When we say military equipment, or we talking about tanks, or a talking about highpowered machine guns, what are we talking about exactly . [laughter] only four or 5 of what is 00 only 4 or 5 is one of of what is provided could be considered military equipment. Prohibitively included things like tanks, grenade launchers, and that, things that were exclusively designed for the military and dont have a Law Enforcement purpose. Only that very limited group of items were excluded from the program. The remaining items that are military in nature, water control blasters, manned aircraft, Armored Vehicles, explosives, Different Things like that. The controlled list only change from the obama executive order trollednsure that an equipment was not provided through k12 Law Enforcement agencies. Agencies thatt are exclusively in k12 schools. It determined that if youre going to seek this equipment, you simply had to state why you needed it. Explainto be able to how you would use it and whether or not you had appropriate training for the equipment. That is it. It did not deny equipment. Host what changes now . Does it change in terms of what equipment is available and where it could go . Guest the executive order issued by the Trump Administration is a wholesale repeal of the obama executive order. T is quite thoughtless as demonstrated by the fact that the Obama Administration spent six months considering the issue before the executive order was issued, and another four months considering what items would be included on which list, a total of 10 months. Officeump has not been in long enough to give that type of consideration. He simply wholesale repeal to the executive order without taking any consideration, taking a look at what was good about it, what was bad about it. It was simply something that the Obama Administration did come us so he repealed it. That is dangerous. Host bob is on the line from indiana. Caller hi, thank you. When military equipment is given to local Law Enforcement, doesnt it become harder to determine for the people to determine whether you are under a domestic Law Enforcement or a military rule of law . Guest it can. It creates the appearance that members of Law Enforcement are the enemy of the people that they are designed to serve and protect, depending on how Law Enforcement uses that equipment. I think that is a concern. In a civilization like the united states, were we work under the rule of the constitution, our members of Law Enforcement are the guardians of those constitutional protections. When they are seen to be treating individuals as if they are enemy combatants and set of citizens with Constitutional Rights, it undermines the legitimacy of the Law Enforcement agencies. It makes it more difficult for them to do their job. It makes it difficult for them to work with the community in order to solve crimes. It make it difficult for them to work with the community in order to solve problems, because the community does not trust Law Enforcement. It undermines the ability of Law Enforcement to do their job. It creates a dangerous situation for both Law Enforcement and the community. Host the Justice Department and those who support this decision site safety as a need to read visit this policy revisit this policy. According to the new york times, nsbs to the fraternal order of alice in nashville, in speech to the fraternal order of police in nashville, Jeff Sessions said these restrictions made it harder for police to protect themselves. He said we will not put superficial concerns about public safety. Guest i believe that is a false narrative. Obama administration did not deny to Law Enforcement a single piece of equipment that they needed. Created a situation where Law Enforcement need to state why they needed it and verify that they can use the equipment. Much of this equipment is deadly. Host just a little bit more times piece. York it says, local Law Enforcement officials have defended the program say it is a way to acquire equipment that is useful in dangerous situations without stretching eight height budget. For example, the Harris CountySheriffs Office in texas received two Armored Vehicles from the program. Another Police Department cited the search for terrorists, like we saw after the Boston Marathon bombing, as a need for this equipment. How can police get this equipment without this program. . Guest the Obama Administration did not and this program. Law enforcement has continued to have access to this equipment, much of which can be useful. The problem arises when Law Enforcement feels that, i need a tank because the town next door to me has a tank. Officer rcement and no Law Enforcement officer has training on a piece of equipment. First of all, you dont need a tank. Second, Something Like a helicopter, something that can be used during a hazardous situation or a disaster. If there is a helicopter available within a region, why does every Law EnforcementAgency Within that region need its own helicopter. Why does a lawenforcement agency with no trained pilot need a helicopter. The Obama Administration merely said, you can have it if you can explain why you need it and if you can prove that you are able to use it. That is it. Host lee is calling in from alabama on our republican line. Caller i would just like to ask if you have ever worn a badge or gone out on the street and had these people throwing rocks and bottles that you. , iveored car, not a tank never seen a tank in any city or any town or any state in the united states. They have issued armored cars, but no tanks. All, i was aof federal prosecutor for 13 years. So i happen out there with fbi agents and local Police Officers. I have been out there and kevlar. I know that it is a dangerous situation. I have appreciation for that. I know there are instances where having an Armored Vehicle, not a tank, can be beneficial. The question is not whether or not the piece of equipment can be useful. The question is whether or not the piece of equipment is appropriate for the Law Enforcement agency requesting that equipment. Host in an opinion piece in the a member of the Cato Institute wrote about his opposition to the reversal of this policy. 2004 sheriff joe a suburbaned home looking for illegal firearms. The officers drove an Armored Vehicle into a parked car, they changed into military style , leading a neighbor to think they mightve been amateur paintball ors or gang members. One of many teargas canisters fired into the home sparked a fire and set the home ablaze. Dog trying to flee the fire was scared back into the home where it died. These materials can be used in any police operation. Guest that is right, and that is part of the problem. One of the things we considered when developing the obama executive order was the input from local people on the streets. From mayors, from academics, from Law Enforcement, from military, from government agencies. We were hearing those types of stories. We were hearing stories of Law Enforcement agencies using this technical equipment to serve search warrants. They were going into communities where children live, where children were being exposed to theence, not by members of community about a the Law Enforcement officers sworn to protect them. That is a situation that creates negative feelings within the community , it undermines the public view of Law Enforcement that is what the Obama Administration and career employees who helped to develop this executive order were thinking of. Were when you say we, you a former Senior Policy Adviser in the executive office of the president as well as a former legislation and policy counsel at the u. S. Department of justice. Now an acting director of the criminal Justice Project at the Lawyers Committee for civil rights under law. Cheryl is calling in from louisiana. Caller good morning. Agreed like to say that i that the military equipment should be put in the hands of those that are qualified, trained, like a swat team. Tanksery city should have , heavy equipment and arms. I have seen a tank in a new orleans area. Being used. I was stunned when i saw that. Unqualified. Our military are not the First Responders that we have to terrorist attacks, it is those who are the First Responders, the Police Officers. I do believe that every large , ay that may feel a threat terrorist threat, such little small city and , your guest has spoken about, no that would be very wasteful. The would not be appropriate in my opinion. Myesha ats give my yo chance to respond. Guest youre hitting on something very important. At the Obama Administration was a career federal employee. I was not a political appointee. The way the white house is worked in the past was to bring over career federal employees to supervise subject matter expertise. One of the things we were looking at was that Law Enforcement officers are called on to do more and more. In order to do more and more they need equipment, they also need better relationships with the community. This executive order was designed to increase the probability that Law Enforcement and the communities that they serve with see each other as friends and necessary partners, that they would be better able to work together. That trust increases safety for avon forstmann officer. It does much more than the provision of equipment to ensure that officers are able to come home safe at night. Host there was a report the Government Accountability office looking into how easy it would be for the department of defense to purchase military equipment. Faux mpanied with a website saying it did highlevel security and counterterrorism a and an address that led to an empty parking lot. Theyre fake cops received 1. 3 million of night vision goggles, simulated rifles, and pipe bomb equipment from the dod 1033 program. They never did any verification like visit our location. They told the marshall project. What is your reaction to how easy it is to get this equipment . Is one of the things that is so shocking about the trump executive order. That was reported only a month ago. Only a month after it is been demonstrated how this equipment is not being properly controlled. The Trump Administration issues an executive order preventing the controls that are in place to prevent situations like this. It is stunning and careless. It is one of the many troubling things that weve seen coming out of this administration. Host what does the gao recommend, what do you recommend to be the counter of this . Guest i recommend a return to the obama executive order. They were designed to create and improve relationships between Law Enforcement and the citizens that they serve. That is one of the things that we are working on at Lawyers Committee for civil rights under law. We focus on hate crimes. I and large, people agree that hate crimes are a problem, particularly in this climate. We are working with the International Association of anefs of police to create Advisory Committee to bring Law Enforcement and the community together. To give them the opportunity to work together, improve relationships, and build trust. To lawrate the Law Enforcement community is not against them, and to demonstrate to the community that Law Enforcement cares and take very seriously their ability to act Constitutional Rights and to protect and serve members of the community. Host there is some bipartisan support rand paul of kentucky wrote an oped piece in the New York Post where he said that the president s policy was a mistake. He writes what kind of equipment we talking about . A own of fewer than 65,000, got a mine resistant ambush protected vehicle. In a town of less than 30,000, they got an eight ton armored bearcat. Over 10,000 bayonets of and handed out. I have not seen a Police Officer wielding a bayonet. Talk a little bit about that. Guest it is one of the things of the Obama Administration focused on. It is something that should have happened in the Trump Administration that did not, that is bringing together all different sides of an argument to devise a joint and common solution. There have been problems with the use of equipment. Most Law Enforcement agencies dont miss use their equipment, but when you are a small Law Enforcement agency, i think approximately 80 of an 87 of all Law Enforcement agencies have less than if you dont have the training to use of equipment, or a budget to maintain this equipment. One of the statement that mayors became to exp