The House is expected to vote today on a budget bill that funds agriculture, food safety and nutrition programs, cutting over $2.6 billion from those programs. But Republicans balked at extra cuts offered by GOP budget hawks, blocking a number of other budget reduction plans in debate this week.
On Wednesday, farm state Republicans led the rebellion, objecting to plans to cut $167 million in farm subsidies as part of this one budget measure for next year.
The plan would have saved money by blocking the payment of agricultural crop subsidies to farmers who have incomes above $250,000 per year.
Rep. Frank Lucas (R-OK), the Chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, objected to that provision - and another one which would have saved money by reducing cotton subsidies. Both were pulled from the bill because of Lucas' procedural objections.
The objections of farm state lawmakers was yet another reminder that while it seems easy enough to find ways to cut the budget, it doesn't always translate into actual cuts and budget savings.
That was also evident by votes on budget cutting amendments from various GOP lawmakers, who pressed for a series of amendments to cut even deeper than the plan offered by Republican leaders on this one budget bill for next year.
"The American people have made it loud and clear that they want spending cuts and debt reduction to be Washington’s foremost priorities," Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) said, as he alone laid out 11 different amendments to the bill, designed to cut $2 billion.
By Wednesday afternoon, the House had voted on a half dozen of Broun's budget cutting plans, easily rejecting all six.
In fact, the best Broun or any other Republican could do was to muster 125 votes for one of his plans, as at times more than half of all House Republicans joined with Democrats to reject these extra budget cutting plans.
It was much like votes earlier this month for an across the board cut in the Homeland Security budget, where just 110 lawmakers voted for $4 billion in savings, as many Republicans again displayed their distaste for extra cuts.
Lots of talk about budget cutting - but not seemingly much of an appetite for more.
"We just have to stop spending money we don't have," Broun argued in vain on the House floor.
At one point, Broun got into a dustup with the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, who verbally rebuked Broun for backing cuts that Rep. Norm Dicks (D-WA) said would "do harm" to Americans.
Dicks chided Broun - a doctor - for violating the Hippocratic Oath that says 'do no harm.'
"I resent the fact that you accuse me of doing harm," Broun said, as he used a parliamentary objection to try to expunge the remarks of Dicks from the record of debate.
After some back and forth, Dicks backed down and revised his words so "they wouldn't be close to an insult."
The snippy debate over the last two days on this bill was yet another reminder that while lots of people in both parties talk big about cutting trillions of dollars or saving money in all areas of the budget, finding agreement on how to do that is like pulling teeth.
It isn't easy, and everything about it is very, very political.
