As chairman of the Senate Budget Committee’s Task Force on Government Performance, Virginia Democrat Mark Warner has put colleagues on notice that he will try to finally put an end to programs targeted for elimination by both President Obama and his predecessor, George W. Bush.

But even in the current fiscal environment, when both parties are professing renewed concern over soaring budget deficits and debt, Warner is finding that easier said than done.

On Thursday, the freshman gained a little ground in his quest — but not without dissent from a few fellow Democrats.

Before the Budget Committee approved a draft fiscal 2011 budget resolution, it adopted an amendment by Warner urging an end to funding for 18 programs that have made repeat appearances on the White House Office of Management and Budget’s termination list.

The targets include an Agriculture Department program launched in 1962 to build community leadership skills and a Commerce Department grant program intended to ease the recently completed conversion to digital TV broadcasting. Spending on the programs totaled $997 million this fiscal year, a mere pittance in a budget of nearly $4 trillion.

The budget resolution does not become law and serves largely as a blueprint for Congress in determining annual spending. Even so, after adoption of Warner’s amendment by voice vote, four senators — Democrats Jeff Merkley of Oregon, Debbie Stabenow of Michigan and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, and independent Bernard Sanders of Vermont — asked that the record reflect their opposition.

Whitehouse, who last year pushed for the committee to put Warner in charge of the task force, said some of the targeted programs help his constituents. He also said the fact that two administrations have suggested terminating a program does not necessarily mean the cut is a good idea.

Stabenow agreed with that reasoning, and said after the markup that she would want to see some “good debate” before Congress acted to end federal programs.

Warner declared himself undaunted. “It’s almost impossible to end funding for an existing program. We need better performance data to show which programs are achieving results,” he said in a statement after the markup. “If we had that information, I believe it will become much harder to defend a program that simply is not working.”