mr. estavez. when was the last time that you are aware in terms of the grant money being given out -- by the way, the homeland security grants aren't based on risks. the others are based on a mandate that came through this committee that said x state would get x percent. when was the last time we have seen what you have given and used other than the response to the tsarnaev brothers, been used against counter terrorism? >> that was the last time. >> when was another time? >> i'm quite sure that new york used the domain awareness system in the times square bombing attempt. that is a funded asset with these grant funds. so within the last few years. >> so we with homeland security grants, with the 1033 program and with the department of justice grants over the last five years we have put out $41 billion worth of money and we know of really two times -- and the point i'm getting to is that we will never have enough money to be totally prepared for everything. so the question is as common sense in jud

mr. estavez.when was the last time that you are aware in terms of the grant money being given out -- by the way, the homeland security grants aren't based on risks. the others are based on a mandate that came through this committee that said x state would get x percent. when was the last time we have seen what you have given and used other than the response to the tsarnaev brothers, been used against counter terrorism? >> that was the last time. >> when was another time? >> i'm quite sure that new york used the domain awareness system in the times square bombing attempt. that is a funded asset with these grant funds. so within the last few years. >> so we with homeland security grants, with the 1033 program and with the department of justice grants over the last five years we have put out $41 billion worth of money and we know of really two times -- and the point i'm getting to is that we will never have enough money to be totally prepared for everything. so the question is as common sense in judg

mr. estavez, you may begin. ou >> thank you. >> mr.n, because i have a conflict later this morning, can i submit a statement for th record, please? for t >> certainly. >> thank you.want i want to associate myself with the remarks of snar mccaskill and thank her for her leadership.heleader >> feel free to summarize. you go much over five minutes ih have to rein you in. >> thank you members of the committee. y tha thank you for the opportunity to appear before the committee andh discuss the importance of transfer of excess military property to law enforcement agencies. ce i appreciate the committee supporting the department and continued interest in insuring success of our mission. following events in ferguson, missouri, i think it is ssouri appropriate to address issues. as you know my written testimony has more detail and i will submit it to the record. the transfer of excess property to law enforcement agencies is congressionallyis authorized program to ensure stewardship of taxpayer resources. the program has provided property that r

mr. estavez, the statute that authorizes the 1033 program requires the secretary of defense to carry out the program in consultation with the attorney general. so i wonder what is the nature of the consultation between the department of defense and the department of justice on this program and is there a discussion of whether a law enforcement agency is under investigation for the possible deprivation of constitutional rights. >> senator, baldwin, the consultation with the department of justice is one of the areas that we are frankly lacking that we need to do a better job of that we will look at under the administration's review and will discuss with this committee. we need to do a better job there. i will say that -- >> currently, and i will accept your statement at face value that you can do better. currently in that consultation, is the matter of an open or closed investigation into civil rights or civil liberties deprivation a part of your discussion or consultation? >> no. >> is there any reason why it could not be in the future? >> of course, it could be. >> okay. is there coordin