Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2016

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, on May 28, 2014, narcotics
agents, assisted by members of the Habersham County, Georgia, Special
Response Team, executed a no-knock search warrant on a home on a quiet
street. Officers terrified the sleeping family but did not find any
drugs when they entered the home.

During the raid, a 2-year-old child, baby Bou Bou, was badly burned
when the officers tossed a flash-bang grenade into his playpen which
was located in a darkened room. The officers justified their actions by
saying that their intelligence indicated that there would be no
children present.

Mr. Chairman, as an editorial in The Washington Post noted: ``A
flash-bang grenade is an explosive device that emits a deafening boom
and a blinding flash of light. It is designed to temporarily stun the
occupants of a building so that the armed men who deployed it can clear
the building. It is an instrument of war.''

My amendment is simple. It would prohibit the transfer of flash-bang
grenades from the Department of Defense to local law enforcement. The
Department of Defense's 1033 program has helped to sometimes distort
the relationship between the police and the communities they serve by
allocating over $5 billion in surplus military equipment to local
police, including flash-bang grenades. Nothing in current law prevents
the military from giving police, including school and university police
departments, flash-bang grenades. Allowing this loophole to exist puts
our communities at risk of increasing militarization.

Mr. Chairman, while we have real tensions across the country, our
police and their communities are not at war. Funneling free military
equipment to the police, however, helps to further deepen the divide in
our communities. The same Washington Post article I mentioned earlier
cited over a dozen incidents in recent years where police injured
themselves or others while using flash-bang grenades.

This amendment is not about regulating what types of equipment law
enforcement agencies should or should not have. Instead, it is about
whether this Congress should purchase flash-bang grenades for fighting
wars abroad and then allow these flash-bang grenades to be transferred
by the Department of Defense back to local law enforcement agencies for
use here at home.

Local governments, in consultation with law enforcement agencies that
they oversee, should decide what types of equipment the law enforcement
agencies can acquire. Law enforcement agencies should not unilaterally
make that decision independent of civilian authority. The local
government can purchase whatever equipment they deem necessary for use
by the agencies under their control through the local budgeting
process, and they can also seek financial assistance through Federal
grants.

This amendment doesn't touch grant money or State or local
governments' freedom to purchase the equipment they need. The local
budget process and Federal grant programs involve making choices based
on need and funding. The 1033 program is an unregulated pipeline of
free equipment directly from the Pentagon to the law enforcement
agency. When the equipment is free and is plentiful and civilian
authority is not involved, the calculus is very simple: why not accept
free gifts of military equipment. However, if acquiring this equipment
militarizes our police departments beyond comprehension, what kind of
community policing are we actually performing? Or are we just simply
occupying?

This amendment, Mr. Chairman, is very common sense. We should
consider whether or not we want our country to move in this direction
of militarization, and we certainly need our civilian authorities to be
involved in that process. So the consequences are too dangerous to keep
proliferating this weaponry on our streets, and I would ask that my
colleagues support this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, sheriff's departments and local
police departments are local peace officers. They enforce the law and
maintain peace and order. Ideally, they are members of the communities
in which they serve.

The Department of Defense's 1033 program has helped to sometimes
distort the relationship between police and their communities by
providing over $5 billion in surplus military equipment to local
police, including armored vehicles and military grade weapons. Police
who patrol the streets and neighborhoods in armored MRAPs, while armed
to the hilt, can easily lose sight of their role, which is to protect
and serve, and, instead, take on the mindset of a paramilitary
occupation force. The routine showing of military authority on our
streets creates mistrust that only further deepens the divide between
law enforcement and the people they are sworn to protect and serve.

My amendment is simple. It would prohibit the transfer of mine
resistant ambush protected vehicles, or MRAPs--for free--straight from
the Department of Defense to local law enforcement agencies.

This amendment is not about regulating what types of equipment law
enforcement agencies and police should not have. Instead, it is about
whether this Congress should purchase MRAPs for fighting wars abroad
and then allow the Department of Defense to give that equipment away to
civilian law enforcement here at home, for free, to use on the streets
of America.

Local governments, in consultation with the law enforcement agencies
they oversee, should decide what types of equipment their law
enforcement agencies can acquire. Law enforcement agencies should not
unilaterally make that decision independent of civilian authority. The
local governments can purchase whatever equipment they deem necessary
for use by the agencies under their control through their local
budgeting process, and they can seek financial assistance to purchase
necessary equipment from Federal grant programs.

This amendment doesn't touch grant money or the State's or local
government's freedom to purchase the equipment it needs. The local
budget process and application for Federal grant programs involve
making choices based on need and funding, while the 1033 program is an
unregulated pipeline of free equipment directly from the Pentagon to
the law enforcement agency.

When the equipment is free and in plentiful supply and civilian
authority is not involved, the calculus is very simple: Why not accept
free equipment? Why not obtain equipment based on desire rather than
need? However, if acquiring the equipment required the use of local
funds or involved applying for grant money, the decision would be more
deliberative and inclusive of civilian authority. Other factors would
be considered, including whether there is a need for such equipment,
how the equipment would be used, and whether the community consents to
being policed with such equipment.

This amendment simply shuts off the pipeline of military equipment
from the battlefield to our main streets. This amendment forces us to
consider whether MRAPs, designed and purchased for battle in the Iraqi
desert, are suitable for our local police. It forces us to consider
whether an ordinary American citizen would truly feel
comfortable in approaching an officer for help if the officer were
behind the wheel of a 15-ton armored vehicle that had just been
returned from combat in Afghanistan.

This amendment would end the transfer of these armored vehicles to
school systems and to universities across the country. Are our children
so unruly that order can only be maintained with the use of an MRAP?

Unless this amendment passes, a vote for the underlying bill will
ultimately fund the purchase of MRAPs, which will, one day, be
transferred back home for use against our constituents. The
consequences are too dangerous to continue this indiscriminate flow of
weaponry to the streets of this Nation. I urge support for this
amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source