Well, this pretty much sums up the state of spending cuts in Congress right now: trying to cut an additional $22 billion is a "double meat-axe approach" that will send us into an "economic death spiral"

Ryan Streeter

This Washington Post read-out on the vote in the House today to defeat an attempt to add $22 billion in cuts to the Republicans' current $61 billion cut is enlightening. It's a good picture of where we budget-cutters find ourselves.

The vote was 147-281. All 147 votes for the amendment were Republicans, but 92 of their party colleagues joined the 189 Democrats to vote against the measure.

Jeff Flake (R-AZ) gets the truth in advertising award: "What we're doing here is a rounding error compared to what we're going to have to do with entitlement spending."

He's right. How hard is it to find an additional $22 billion? Entitlement programs waste that much every year by mistakes and fraud.

But, no, the demogoguery caucus won the day.

Here are the money quotes:

"This amendment would commit this country to an economic death spiral." - Jim Moran (D-VA). Cutting $22 billion would result in a "death spiral?"  C'mon, Moran. [Full disclosure: Moran was my representative when I lived in Alexandria, VA, for 7 years. I never voted for him.]

"[These] across-the-board cuts are a lazy member's way to achieve something." - Dan Lungren (R-CA). Lazy? I believe the RSC members at least researched and typed up their ideas while you were doing something else.

"I've got to say to my conservative friends, when you cut across the board, who do you think is going to be in charge of where these cuts come from?" - Jack Kingston (R-GA). Um, what?

"I realize it's a well-intentioned effort, but it goes too far." - Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO). It doesn't even bring us to the $100 billion that the Republicans pledged in their Pledge To America. Too far?

Saving the best for last: "This is a meat-axe approach on top of a meat-axe approach. It's a double-meat-axe approach." - Norm Dicks (D-WA). OK, Mr. Dicks, whatever you say.