Uzi does it

Elected to be the NRA’s point man in Congress, he worked to kill the assault weapons ban.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Bob Barr (R-Geor.) has never met a gun he didn’t like. That and his power position in the House earn him high marks from the National Rifle Association. In 1993-94, the NRA spent more than $4.7 million to help the Republicans take over Congress. And no other member of the House owes as much to the gun group as Barr. The NRA hand-picked him for the primary and then, in a move motivated by revenge, helped him defeat veteran Democrat Buddy Darden in November.

Early in 1994, when Barr began his run for Congress, the NRA provided his campaign with critical support and worked closely with him to get out the vote, knowing that with the low turnout expected for the off-year primary, it could make the difference. The Georgia Gun Owners’ PAC, which received funds from the NRA, also threw its support behind Barr and provided $5,000 in crucial money for the primary race. Barr won handily.

The NRA put $4,950 more into Barr’s campaign coffers when he moved on to face Darden in the general election. During his 11 previous years in Congress, Darden had enjoyed the NRA’s backing. But not this time. Darden, annoyed at the organization’s backroom maneuvering, had voted for the president’s 1994 crime bill, which included the assault weapons ban. “The NRA decided to make an example of Buddy Darden, as a warning to others,” says a leading Democratic strategist in Georgia. (A similar scenario played out in Texas, where Steve Stockman defeated Rep. Jack Brooks, a longtime NRA friend.)

The NRA backed Barr’s campaign even though he seemed vulnerable on the “character” issue. Married three times and embroiled in a messy court battle with his second wife over his failure to pay child support, Barr had been photographed in 1992 licking whipped cream off two buxom young women’s chests. And this from the man who would later sponsor the Defense of Marriage Act.

But with the support of a far-right coalition including elements of the NRA, the John Birch Society, the Christian Coalition, and the National Right to Life Committee, Barr won the election with 52 percent of the vote. The payoff for the NRA came in early 1995, when Newt Gingrich appointed a task force to examine firearms legislation. At the NRA’s urging, the speaker named Barr to head the task force.

Barr’s agenda is unabashedly pro-NRA. He proposes abolishing the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms and revoking the Brady Bill that requires waiting periods for the purchase of handguns. This summer he stumped for a bill that eliminated funding for research at the Centers for Disease Control on gun-related fatalities. “[The CDC has] not eradicated disease,” said Barr. “They have work left to do.”

Most importantly, he engineered the March 22 House vote repealing the ban on semiautomatic assault weapons. “It was Bob Barr’s job to get it done, and he did,” says Neal Knox, the NRA’s first vice president.

Three times, Barr charged up the Hill to push the repeal vote. He managed to get a vote scheduled for May 1995, but it was taken off the agenda after the Oklahoma City bombing. Last fall, Barr organized more than 100 of his colleagues, Democrats as well as Republicans, to repeal the ban. But his effort got lost in the furor over the 1996 budget.

Finally, in early March this year, Barr had lined up enough House members to force a vote. With only two hours scheduled for debate, and no committee hearings, the bill passed 239-173. Sixty-eight out of 86 House freshmen voted to repeal the ban.

Tanya Metaksa, executive director of the NRA’s political arm, told Mother Jones, “It wasn’t the task force that got the vote scheduled. It was Bob. He convinced his colleagues in the Republican Caucus to do it.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate