Skip to content

Archive for May, 2011

May 30

14 Comments

What Is The Louisiana Family Forum?

They’re considered one of the most influential lobbying organizations in the State of Louisiana. On their website and their Facebook page, they’re upfront about their true mission: Influencing legislators and legislation. They publish an annual legislative scorecard, and every year, they host a lavish dinner for selected legislators, doling out awards and commendations.

And every year, they raise and then spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in tax-deductible donations.

The Louisiana Family Forum may, on its surface, appear to be nothing more than a powerful lobbying group that represents the interests of far-right Christian conservatives, but officially, the Louisiana Family Forum is organized as both a 501c3 and a 501c4.

The 501c3 is the money-maker, the Louisiana Family Forum (LFF), the tax-deductible half of the organization. But because it’s a 501c3, the LFF is limited by how much money it can spend on lobbying. Thankfully, there’s an easy way around this problem. The other half of the organization is the Louisiana Family Forum Action (LFFA), their 501c4. LFFA is still tax-exempt, but, because it can spend as much as it wants on lobbying, there are no tax-deductible donations. It’s an important distinction.

Why?

The Internal Revenue Service explains the lobbying constraints on 501c3s:

In general, no organization may qualify for section 501(c)(3) status if a substantial part of its activities is attempting to influence legislation (commonly known as lobbying).  A 501(c)(3) organization may engage in some lobbying, but too much lobbying activity risks loss of tax-exempt status.

Legislation includes action by Congress, any state legislature, any local council, or similar governing body, with respect to acts, bills, resolutions, or similar items (such as legislative confirmation of appointive office), or by the public in referendum, ballot initiative, constitutional amendment, or similar procedure.  It does not include actions by executive, judicial, or administrative bodies.

An organization will be regarded as attempting to influence legislation if it contacts, or urges the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or if the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation.

Organizations may, however, involve themselves in issues of public policy without the activity being considered as lobbying.  For example, organizations may conduct educational meetings, prepare and distribute educational materials, or otherwise consider public policy issues in an educational manner without jeopardizing their tax-exempt status.

The Louisiana Family Forum, the 501c3 half, defines itself to the IRS as an educational organization. Their mission is simply stated, “Education and Promotion of Family Values.” According to their most recent 990 report, the LFF has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars every year for several years on salaries and “consulting” services (also listed as “Other” under “Fees for Services”). It spends tens of thousands of dollars every year on travel costs. Despite this, though, it only itemized $35,628 in lobbying expenditures in 2009.

(Click to expand)

At the same time, the LFF funneled $201,646 to Louisiana Family Forum Action, their 501c4. The LFFA’s total revenue in 2009 was $204,546. Interestingly, $201,646, the exact amount transferred by the LFF, is itemized as by the LFFA as “consulting” services.

(Click to expand)

(Click to expand. See item #9)

To be clear, I believe the only reason the LFF would create the LFFA, a separately organized and legally distinct off-shoot, is because they recognized a 501c4 better allows them to lobby.

Here’s the problem, though: The Louisiana Family Forum receives hundreds of thousands of dollars every year in tax-deductible donations, and the Louisiana Family Forum Action, which is not tax-deductible, receives nearly 99% of its annual revenue from its sister organization, the other half. In other words, if you give money to the LFF, which you can deduct from your taxes, the chances are that you’re also helping to fund the LFFA, which isn’t tax-deductible. From Hurwit and Associates, a firm that specializes in providing legal advice to non-profit organizations:

Suffice it to say that if no more than five to ten percent of an organization’s total efforts are devoted to lobbying, it is probably acting within legal limits.

Many organizations shy away from activities they presume to be lobbying but which in fact fall outside of the definition of lobbying, which is narrowly defined by the IRS. Generally speaking, lobbying is the expression of a view or a call to action on specific legislation. Lobbying does not include, for instance, nonpartisan analysis of legislation, the expression of a position on issues (as opposed to legislation) of public concern, or action taken in “self-defense” of the organization.

If more than an insubstantial amount of an organization’s resources are devoted to lobbying, the organization may wish to choose what is called a 501(h) election. This allows the organization to expend up to approximately 20% of its funds on lobbying.

If you wish to lobby more than that, you might want to consider establishing a separate 501(c)(4) tax-exempt organization specifically for the purposes of advocacy and lobbying. The main difference between 501(c)(3) and (c)(4) organizations is that contributions to the latter are not tax-deductible.

Notwithstanding the serious questions about whether or not the Louisiana Family Forum expends a substantial amount of its resources on lobbying for specific legislation, there’s another problem: If a 501c3 gives money to a 501c4, it has to be spent like 501c3 money, which means it can’t just be moved around to fund a lobbying apparatus. From SourceWatch (bold mine):

The U.S. tax code makes special provision for non-profit groups which are, once approved by the Internal Revenue Service, exempt from paying income tax.

However, whether contributions by individuals can be claimed as a deduction against personal income tax depends on whether the organisation is registered as a non-profit group under section 501c(3) or 501c(4) of the tax code.

Contributions to a 501(c)(3) organization can be claimed against income tax but donations to a 501(c)(4) entity cannot. While 501(c)(3) groups – which range from religious organizations, traditional service provision charities through to advocacy organisations – are more attractive to individual donors, the tax code places restrictions on the amount of funds that can be spent on lobbying and bans funds being used on election campaigns. However, what constitutes lobbying - defined as urging a vote on legislation – and educational activities is one of gray zones that is constantly debated.

From a fundraising point of view it is much harder to raise money for a 501(c)(4) group, because individual donors cannot deduct the contributions from their taxable income. However, such organizations are free to spend as much of their funds as they like lobbying on legislation.

Often a non-profit groups will have two related entities – one a 501(c)(3) and another a 501(c)(4). Under the tax code provisions it is perfectly legal to transfer funds from a 501(c)(3) to a 501(c)(4)organisation. However, the restrictions on how funds are spent by the original 501(c)(3) carry over on the funds transferred to the 501(c)(4).

So, what does this all mean?

First, it means that if the Louisiana Family Forum (LFF) is providing nearly 99% of the funding for the Louisiana Family Forum Action (LFFA), then the LFFA should be subjected to the same lobbying constraints as its sister organization. Still, it’s not clear what, exactly, the LFFA spends its money on. This is how they describe the way in which they spent the $201,646 provided to them by the Louisiana Family Forum:

Apparently, the LFFA spent every tax-deductible dime they received from the LFF on “consulting services.” How much did the LFF spend on consulting services during the same time period? Officially, nothing, but curiously, the LFF lists $203,106 as “Other” under “Fees for Services (non-employees).”

It’s also worth noting that the LFF disclosed they spent $35,628 with the LFFA specifically for “lobbying expenses.” This begs the question: How much money did the LFFA state as lobbying expenses? Exactly zero dollars and zero cents, at least according to their most recent 990.

Given the ways in which both the LFF and the LFFA vaguely describe their expenses, it’s difficult to determine what they’re buying with the hundreds of thousands of dollars they spend every year on consulting services and services for “non-employees.” In 2008, the LFF itemized over $123,000 as expenses related to its “newsletter;” the next year, the number shrank to less than $14,000.

But what is clear, however, is that the Louisiana Family Forum is widely considered as a powerful and influential force in the Louisiana legislature. Just last week, at the invitation of Congressman Steve Scalise, Gene Mills, the LFF’s Executive Director, delivered the opening prayer for the United States Congress. Reverend Mills appears to be on a hot streak.

While he was in Washington, D.C., his organization successfully prevented the repeal of the Louisiana Family Forum’s signature piece of legislation: the Louisiana Science Education Act. The Louisiana Family Forum, along with the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based think tank that promotes “intelligent design,” wrote the Louisiana Science Education Act in 2008. It was then introduced by State Senator Ben Nevers, who publicly admitted that he was acting at the request of the LFF, and subsequently signed into law by Governor Bobby Jindal. Nevers, the current Chairman of the Senate Education Committee, does not have a bachelors degree; Jindal, on the other hand, has a degree in Biology from Brown University.

Only a few years prior, in 2004, Dan Richey, the LFF’s “grassroots coordinator,” was hired to work on Senator David Vitter’s first campaign for the United States Senate. Vitter paid Richey over $17,000, and three years later, Vitter attempted to earmark $100,000 in federal funds so that the Louisiana Family Forum could draft model legislation for public school science education. At the time, the LFF, an organization with an overtly religious mission, made it clear: They wanted to allow the teaching of creationism and intelligent design in the science classroom. The earmark may have failed, but the LFF still pressed on.

Last year, Richey, incidentally, was also paid handsomely as a “grassroots” consultant for Roger Villere’s campaign for Lieutenant Governor. Although he lost the election, Mr. Villere was and still is the Executive Director for the Louisiana Republican Party.

If lobbying is, in fact, the “expression of a view or a call to action on specific legislation,” then what do you call it when a tax-exempt, tax-deductible organization actually writes the legislation?

The Louisiana Science Education Act isn’t the only piece of “specific legislation” that the LFF has targeted. Two weeks ago, Gene Mills gloated that he was able to kill HB112, which would have better protected school children from bullying, by simply writing a floor note to the legislature.

There’s a good reason we have laws that govern the ways in which tax-exempt, tax-deductible organizations can influence our democratic process, and there’s a good reason we also have laws that govern the activities of lobbyists. Subverting or skirting those laws, no matter who you are or how noble your cause may be, is never acceptable. Neither is using religion as camouflage. The Louisiana Family Forum may be led by a reverend, but it’s not a church.

When Governor Jindal was elected, he vowed to ensure that Louisiana’s ethics laws met “the gold standard.” Although, ironically, Mr. Jindal has continued to push back against requirements for increased transparency in the Governor’s Office, he still signed into law a sweeping set of disclosure requirements for almost everyone else in the State who could, potentially, influence legislation, even volunteer members of local commissions. Yet an organization that is widely considered as one of the most powerful lobbying forces in the State, somehow, they can spend hundreds of thousands of dollars without actually disclosing what they’re buying.

Bienvenue ’a Louisiane. 

May 30

6 Comments

Former LA Legislator Speaks Out Against the Louisiana Family Forum

From 2002 to 2007, Monica Walker-Weisul served the people of Avoyelles Parish in the Louisiana House of Representatives. After winning a special election to replace Charles Riddle in 2002, Ms. Walker-Weisul ran unopposed in 2003. She decided not to seek re-election in 2007.

During her time in the State legislature, Representative Walker-Weisul learned, first-hand, about the ways in which the Louisiana Family Forum influences our elected officials and steers legislation. After she left a comment on my post about Gene Mills, the LFF’s Executive Director, I asked Ms. Walker-Weisul if she would be willing to answer a few questions, via e-mail, for publication on the blog. Thankfully, she readily agreed.

Here are my questions and her answers, posted in full:

Lamar White: First, thank you for agreeing to answer a few questions. There aren’t many people, particularly current or former legislators, who are willing to speak out about the Louisiana Family Forum. Why do you feel compelled to speak out?

Monica Walker-Weisul: My husband and I are living in Montana now, but I still enjoy keeping up with the Legislature when they are in session. I was shocked when Rep. Badon’s anti-bullying bill did not pass. Then I became angry when I read that Gene Mills with the Louisiana Family Forum characterized the bill as a part of a homosexual agenda, which is absolutely absurd. Mr. Mills has one view of what the world should be, and if you don’t agree with him, you are wrong. I just can’t sit by and watch his bigotry and prejudice without calling him on it.

LW: In basic terms, can you explain how the Louisiana Family Forum influences the legislature? 

MWW: The Louisiana Family Forum is like many other organizations in that they identify proposed legislation to support or oppose. They also recruit legislators to introduce legislation for them to promote their so-called “family values.”

LW: More than likely, most Louisianans have never even heard of the Louisiana Family Forum, yet some consider them to be one of if not the most powerful lobbying group in the State. Are they really that powerful? 

MWW: I agree with you. I don’t believe most people in Louisiana have heard of the LFF, because if they had, I believe there would be more opposition to some of the things this group supports. In Baton Rouge, unfortunately, they do carry a big stick with some legislators. It’s amazing really, almost cult-like. I believe most Louisianans are more open-minded and tolerant of people and issues outside of their comfort zones, something the LFF is incapable of doing. We are all children of God and someone needs to remind the LFF of that.

LW: Have you ever had any personal run-ins with the LFF or with Gene Mills? If so, can you share some of your impressions? 
MWW: Yes, I have. Several years ago a friend’s daughter was working with Gene Mills and the LFF. They had a room set up in what she described as their “war room” where they had pictures of legislators that had a different opinion or didn’t vote with them. My picture was on that wall, and it really upset my friend’s daughter. Their goal was to recruit people to run against those of us who didn’t support them.In simple terms, Gene Mills would like nothing better than to remove any democratic legislator because they don’t agree with the conservative values he promotes. He’s even gone as far as calling democrats an “endangered species” and at some point there might need to be a quota so democrats can serve. It’s a pompous attitude and one that is so far off base in our political world.

LW: Every year, the LFF publishes a scorecard for each and every legislator. The scorecard is not widely distributed, but for some reason, it seems to be one of their most powerful tools. Are our lawmakers really worried about earning a low score from the LFF? 

MWW: Yes, but mostly those legislators who tend to be more right-wing in their beliefs.  For the most part, moderate Republicans and most Democrats don’t pay that much attention to their scorecard. I will say that the LFF will try to intimidate legislators who have opposing views on issues by labeling them “anti-family”. When Gene Mills and the LFF would walk into a committee hearing, you just knew there was a hidden agenda in the proposed legislation, and more likely a very prejudiced one at that!

What angers a lot of people about the LFF is their hypocritical stance, saying they are acting in the name of God, but you are not one of God’s children unless Gene Mills and the LFF say so.  In that case, the rules are very different for any group that doesn’t fit the LFF mold.

LW: Aside from Gene Mills, do you know if anyone else lobbies on behalf of the LFF? 

MWW: I’m not aware of any other group that lobbies on behalf of the LFF. Most groups are more open-minded and I believe they don’t want to be associated with the LFF.
****

Next: What is the Louisiana Family Forum?

May 30

Musical Interlude

This is bizarre. I don’t know who recorded this and uploaded it to YouTube, but I was sitting next this person and can hear myself singing along in this video. (As a side note, Monsters of Folk was the best show I’ve attended in years).

Respect to my friend in Berlin. How his buddies are being interpreted by kids at PS22 in New York:

May 24

3 Comments

“All I Did Was Drop a Floor Note” — Gene Mills (Part Two)

Last week, at the urging of the Louisiana Family Forum and its Executive Director, Gene Mills, the Louisiana legislature killed House Bill 112, also known as the Safe Schools Bill. The bill sought to better protect school children from bullying, but that’s not how Gene Mills saw it. Mills rebranded HB 112 as the “Homosexual Bullying Bill.” Mike Hasten of Gannett reports (bold mine), “What should have been a debate over what we could do in House Bill 112 to protect our children became a homophobic witch hunt. At the core of it was Gene Mills, the director of a conservative religious group called the Louisiana Family Forum.”

As Mills proved last week, he may be one of “the most powerful” influences in Louisiana, as he was recently described by The Baton Rouge Advocate, but if so, he’s also one of the most destructive influences in Louisiana.

Consider this: Yesterday, the Texas State Senate, one of the most conservative bodies in the country, unanimously approved HB 1942, an anti-bullying bill almost identical to the one the Louisiana legislature defeated at the behest of Mills and the Louisiana Family Forum. Later yesterday afternoon, the Texas State Senate passed HB 1386, a teen suicide prevention bill that “was originally called Asher’s Law in honor of Asher Brown, the 13-year gay youth from the Houston area who took his own life last year in response to bullying at school.”

I wonder what Mills would say if the Louisiana legislature ever dared to consider a teen suicide prevention bill named in honor of a gay teenager who killed himself after being tormented by bullying. Would this also qualify as a “Homosexual Bullying Bill”?

Yesterday, I focused on Mills’s flippant, gloating response to his lobbying victory, but there is much more to the story.

The Louisiana Family Forum repeatedly and publicly lied about the content and the intent of HB 112. They advanced a completely disingenuous and utterly absurd series of talking points. If the 54 men and women in the legislature who voted against this bill were more concerned with doing their job than with appeasing a small group of well-paid and well-connected lobbyists masquerading as religious leaders, then they could have easily picked apart Mills and the Louisiana Family Forum. Gene Mills may prefer to be called “Reverend Mills,” but the truth is, Mr. Mills is actually the one and only officially registered lobbyist for Louisiana Family Forum Action, the LFF’s 501c4 and an organization that reports an income of over $180,000, even though it only has less than $800 in assets.

According to Mills’s lobbying disclosure reports, the bulk of the money he spends on behalf of the LFFA is for an annual legislative awards banquet. For at least the last two years, Mills has spent nearly $50,000 on these events, treating selected state representatives and senators to a fancy dinner at the Crowne Plaza in Baton Rouge and doling out dozens of plaques and trophies, honoring the elected officials who supported the LFF’s legislative agenda. I’m sure it’s a feel-good event: Everyone gets a great meal and goes home with an award. Last year, Senator Ben Nevers (D- Bogalusa) was one of several legislators honored by the Louisiana Family Forum with their “Family Advocate Award.” Senator Nevers introduced the Louisiana Science Education Act, on behalf of the LFF, and currently chairs the Louisiana State Senate Education Committee. Even though Senator Nevers is a Democrat, Mills and the LFF were more than happy to treat him to a $39.17 dinner and hand him a piece of brass for being a loyal foot solider and putting forward the LSEA because they essentially told him to.

Senator Elbert Guillory, the African-American Democrat who made statewide news after endorsing the Louisiana Family Forum’s blatantly illegal Congressional redistricting plan, didn’t win any awards from the LFF last year, but as Mills’s reports indicate, Elbert Guillory was obviously very important to him. As a refresher, Elbert Guillory is also the guy who was forced to resign from his position as Seattle, Washington’s Human Rights Director after allegedly awarding and then overseeing a contract to his then-fiancee’s company and who was previously found by the Louisiana Office of Disciplinary Council to have violated multiple Rules of Professional Conduct in his capacity as an attorney. Gene Mills didn’t spend an inordinate amount of money lobbying Senator Guillory, but as his own reports demonstrate, he still spent more courting Senator Guillory than anyone else.

But I digress.

To be continued…

May 24

5 Comments

“All I Did Was Drop a Floor Note.” – Gene Mills

Congratulations to Gene Mills, Executive Director of the Louisiana Family Forum, for his courageous decision to publicly admit that he can easily control the Louisiana legislature.

Last week, the Louisiana legislature debated the merits of a relatively innocuous school bullying bill.

In short, the bill said (paraphrasing here): Kids, don’t bully people. Don’t bully other kids because they’re different. Don’t bully them because they’re physically or mentally challenged. Don’t bully them because they’re overweight. Don’t bully them because you think they may be gay. Bullying is bad. Be civilized and respectful. It’s a public classroom.

Austin Badon’s HB 112 was endorsed and supported by the Louisiana Association of Educators. After all, it’s common sense.

But don’t tell that to Gene Mills. Under his leadership, the so-called Louisiana “Family” Forum has had very little to do with promoting families and much more to do with fighting gay and lesbian Louisianans. At times, the LFF appears to be nothing more than an organization that implicitly endorses discrimination and bigotry.

****

In addition to the Louisiana Association of Educators, HB 112 was also supported by at least two Louisiana-based gay rights organizations– notably, the Forum for Equality. These organizations rallied hard for the legislation. They handed out petitions and solicited endorsements. More than likely, they believed the bill was innocuous enough to pass. There’s not a lobby for bigoted school bullies, right? From Gannett columnist Mike Hasten:

What should have been a debate over what we could do in House Bill 112 to protect our children became a homophobic witch hunt.

At the core of it was Gene Mills, the director of a conservative religious group called the Louisiana Family Forum. Mills regularly injects his opinion into state government, so much so that one senator asked last year in debate of a seemingly innocuous bill, “How does the Family Forum stand on this?”

The senator said that since he had not received information from Family Forum, the bill should be shelved until he heard from Mills. The Senate agreed. The next week, the bill sailed through, seemingly with Mills’ blessings.

Do any of you ever remember voting for Gene Mills for a statewide office?

Even Mills seems to know that the joke’s on us. Mills, who probably speaks about homosexuality more than the vast majority of gay and lesbian Americans, singled out the support of gay rights groups in order to paint HB 112 as a “homosexual bullying bill.” How Christlike. Quoting:

After the bill was defeated, Mills told a reporter that the reaction to his message “was the kind of thing that was amusing. All I did was drop a floor note.”

If all Mills has to do is drop a floor note. then please allow me:

FLOOR NOTE.

Dear Honorable Representatives and Senators:

Gene Mills knows that he owns you.

Respectfully,

Lamar

May 23

Dobro Blagodaram!

Please forgive my recent, unannounced hiatus from the blog.

One of my best friends, Eftim, got married last weekend in Croatia, and he invited around a dozen of his friends from Louisiana to the celebration. Eftim is like family to me; my brother was his best man, so there was no way I could have possibly missed the ceremony and the celebration. We’d been planning the trip for nearly a year, and not to brag or anything, but it was the most incredible wedding I’ve ever been to in my entire life: a veritable global summit with representatives from the United States, Canada, Egypt, Germany, and Macedonia. It even made the local Croatian news (My brother is on the left, in the brown suit, and if you squint hard enough, you can see me in the background):

Congratulations to Eftim and his bride Marlen. Eftim moved from Macedonia to the United States, on his own, when he was only sixteen, graduated from ASH and then from Centenary, and then moved to Germany, where he earned a Masters in Quantitative Economics. His bride, Marlen, is from Dresden, Germany, and they met when she was studying abroad at Centenary.

More importantly, to Eftim and Marlen, thank you, thank you, thank you.

May 12

Stay Tuned

Just taking a short break.

Currently, I’m driving through Ljubljana, Slovenia. (Literally, as this awful, hastily -taken cell phone photo demonstrates).

20110512-025439.jpg

Stay tuned.

May 4

8 Comments

“We Got Him”

1.

On the morning of September 11, 2001, when the first plane struck the World Trade Center, I was asleep in my college dorm room. My friend Daniel called from across campus to wake me up. “Turn on the TV,” he said. “A plane just hit the World Trade Center.” I lumbered into the dorm’s living room and turned on the television. My roommates were still asleep. In those first few moments, I thought that it was surely an accident. “Decades ago, a plane hit the Empire State Building,” I remember saying.

Then, the second plane hit. Clearly, it was no accident. I woke everyone up.

When news broke about a plane hitting the Pentagon, I began working the phones. I didn’t know anyone who worked at the World Trade Center, but I knew my Uncle David worked at the Pentagon. My family didn’t hear from him until hours later. David’s a medical doctor and a flight surgeon. His experience on that day, as a first responder, is truly remarkable, and I won’t cheapen it by attempting to tell it.

Ten years later, the media narrative is that Americans hadn’t even heard of Osama bin Laden until September 11th. This is total nonsense. Americans knew the name well. The attack on the USS Cole had occurred less than a year before. They also knew al-Qaeda was responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombings. When it was apparent to my friends and I that this was an actual terrorist attack, we all knew it was likely the work of bin Laden and al-Qaeda, and we were all teenagers.

At 10:30 that Tuesday morning, I was supposed to be in a Political Science class. I’d already heard that most professors were canceling classes, and I assumed my Political Science professor would understand why her students missed class that day. I later learned from one of my classmates that the professor was anything but understanding. As she called roll, she apparently ridiculed those students who were absent. Over half of the class had skipped. Another one of my classmates, who also skipped class that day, learned, hours later, that her father had been killed in the attacks. (If there is any cosmic justice to this, it’s that the professor who ridiculed students for not attending her 10:30AM “Women in Politics” class on September 11th, including the girl whose father was killed, was basically fired at the end of the semester).

Downtown Houston was evacuated that afternoon. The Rice campus was on lockdown. Classes were canceled for the remainder of the week. The panic and anxiety were palpable. Students stayed up all night, pouring over television sets.

My roommate’s uncle, as it turned out, was a member of the Secret Service. They were able to speak a few times throughout the day. I am not, by any means, a conspiracy theorist, but I vividly remember my roommate telling me, “There may be more hijacked planes, as many as five or six, and they are also worried about Amtrak.” It was an incredibly frightening hypothetical, one that, thankfully, turned out to be false. Incidentally, the next day, two men from India were arrested on an Amtrak train in Texas, after authorities discovered they were traveling with box cutters and thousands of dollars in cash, but it was later determined those men were not connected to the 9/11 attacks.

2.

The next semester, I enrolled in an Anthropology class about terrorism. America had already declared war on the Taliban and against any government that knowingly harbored terrorists. My professor and some of my fellow students were convinced that this was criminal. I rarely spoke up in that class, but one day, after listening to an entire lecture about the “social trauma” we were about to inflict on the people of Afghanistan, I had to say something. No one can deny the trauma and the barbarism of war, but I was fed up.

“We were attacked, right?” I asked the class. “3,000 Americans died, and you are all concerned about the political sovereignty of a small group of thugs who are sheltering the man responsible for a mass murder.” Ostensibly, the class was about social trauma, but there seemed to be a disconnect between trauma and justice.

The professor gave me a D on my mid-term examination. I could have withdrawn from the class, but I didn’t want to. Despite our disagreements and despite my belief that my D had more to do with my political perspective than my academic performance, I had a lot of respect for this particular professor. She had personally experienced the violence and trauma of war in South America. I had and continue to have a vastly different perspective on the merits of warfare, but I wanted to understand why she had so readily dismissed me. I began meeting with her regularly during her office hours. Over time, I understood that she primarily wanted her students to appreciate that warfare was dynamic, that it had tentacles; its indirect impact was often more damaging than anything you could immediately calculate.

I wrote my final paper on the role of race in the War on Drugs, and she gave me an A in the class.

3.

I was at Cafe du Monde in New Orleans when President Bush declared war on Iraq. A heavy-set, African-American waitress shouted patrons into silence. “Attention, attention, America is going to war against Iraq,” she yelled. President Bush wouldn’t make his official declaration until hours later, but the news was out. One of my friends burst into tears. “This is not right,” she said. “It has nothing to do with bin Laden.”

At the time I publish this, one of my best friends in the world (I was a groomsman at his wedding) is waking up on a U.S. military base in the suburbs of Baghdad. He’s been shot at, but he’s actually not there to fight. His primary task is to ensure the orderly retreat of his fellow U.S. soldiers.

A few years ago, another one of my best friends (I was also a groomsman at his wedding) fought in combat in Northern Iraq. It was during the height of the war. He’d try to reassure his family and his friends that he was safe and perfectly fine, but we all knew better. Once he finally returned home, he resigned from the military, at the age of 22, and began publicly protesting the war. It wasn’t political for him; it was personal.

A kid I went to elementary school with was killed in combat in Iraq. A friend of mine from high school was severely wounded. Thankfully, he survived and recovered. Then, he went back.

When President Obama revealed to the world that Osama bin Laden had been killed, he hinted at something that necessitates amplification (bold mine):

We give thanks for the men who carried out this operation, for they exemplify the professionalism, patriotism, and unparalleled courage of those who serve our country. And they are part of a generation that has borne the heaviest share of the burden since that September day.

I may be, technically speaking, a member of this generation, but I have not borne the same sacrifices as my friends and peers who serve in the military. The vast majority of the boots on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan were, like me, teenagers on September 11, 2001.  (28 is the average age of the U.S. military).

9/11 was a defining moment for our nation, but it was THE defining moment for my generation.

It’s strange for me to consider that my little cousins probably don’t remember what the country was like before September 11th, that the only America they know is a country that has always been at war. Multiple wars. Expensive, wide-ranging, brutal wars.

4.

Remember this: In both Afghanistan and Iraq, our stated objective for going into war was to bring to justice to those responsible for attacking America on September 11, 2001. That’s what my friends signed up for. No one signed up to build astroturf democracies or to become a pawn in some international geopolitical chess game.

I supported President Bush’s decision to go to war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, but I never- not even for a second- believed or supported the War in Iraq. But the purpose of this post is not to re-litigate the past.

5.

“We got him,” President Obama said in the White House Situation Room immediately after learning of bin Laden’s demise.

I don’t pretend to be an expert in foreign policy, but as I recall from nearly ten years ago, there was a clear and unifying cause for going to war: To get Osama bin Laden and to dismantle his terrorist organization. Of course, it is impossible to know, right now, whether or not bin Laden’s death will result in the dismantling of al-Qaeda in the same way that Hitler’s death represented the definitive end of Nazism, and it would be premature and unwise to believe that.

Like him or not, President Barack Obama made an epochal, gutsy decision, and our Navy SEALs executed their orders brilliantly and effectively.

6.

Some of my friends and fellow bloggers believe it’s inappropriate to celebrate the death of another human being, even someone as vile and contemptuous as Osama bin Laden. Although I understand their ambivalence, I respectfully disagree.

When I watched the scores of people running toward the gates of the White House and the perimeter of Ground Zero immediately after the news had been leaked, I didn’t think that those people (most of whom were younger than I am) were there to gloat over the assassination of a single person; I thought about my friends and my peers who fought and are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. I thought of my buddy in Iraq, who just welcomed his first child into the world, a baby girl he can only watch when he and his wife video-chat on Skype (and thank God for Skype).

So, although it may seem strange or even wrong to react with joy over the news of someone else’s death, I’d rather think of it this way: This isn’t about one man. This is about the service and sacrifice of the men and women who risk their lives to protect ours.

And while these wars may still be far from over, hopefully, the death of the world’s most wanted and most powerful terrorist represents the beginning of the end.