The director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russ Vought, was recently quoted saying that “the appropriations process has to be less bipartisan.”

While it’s easy to think this would lead to less of the frustrating gridlock that can overtake the budgetary process, Vought is both procedurally and substantively wrong: The answer is more bipartisanship.

If this sounds naïve, consider the alternative.

The first and most obvious issue is realism. Thanks to the Senate filibuster, 60 votes are required to invoke cloture and end debate before proceeding to a final vote on legislation. With only 53 Republicans in the Senate, it’s easy for Democrats to grind things to a halt, and vice-versa under Democratic majorities.

Unless Vought is implicitly calling for an end to the filibuster — an unlikely event, though Trump has argued for it in the past — expecting government funding bills to be passed without a large, messy bipartisan effort is fanciful thinking.

Presumably, Vought wants to make it easier to pass spending cuts such as the recent $9 billion rescissions package. The recissions process is notably exempted from the filibuster, meaning only a simple majority is required to rescind money which was previously appropriated (most likely with........

© The Hill