Republicans are famously better at framing issues than Democrats; I've even heard Democrats using the word "Democrat" as an adjective lately—as in "Democrat budget"—which, in addition to being grammatically incorrect, is a cave the GOP game plan of turning the Democratic brand into a dirty word. (When you use "Democrat" as an adjective, it lands heavy on "rat.")

But as savvy as Republicans are, I've got to hand it to the Democrats—they've won the framing war on the budget standoff in Olympia between the two budgets on the table, the house budget written by Democratic budget chief Rep. Ross Hunter (D-48, Medina) and the competing budget written by Republican budget leader, Sen. Joe Zarelli (R-18, Ridgefield).

As the Democrats have framed it, here's what it boils down to: The Democratic budget funds education, the Republican budget cuts education. Ouch.

And non-partisan staff in Olympia backs up the Democrats on this point: The K-12 line item "K-12 Education Total" says it all. The house Democratic budget adds $11 million to K-12 education while the Republican budget cuts $43 million. In other words,  the GOP lags $54 million behind the Democrats.

When it comes to higher education (line item "Higher Education Institutions Total"), the Democratic budget adds $242,000 while the Republican budget cuts $30 million.[pullquote]The Democrats are winning. When's the last time Republicans were trying to make the case that they were spending more than Democrats? Who's framing the debate now?[/pullquote]

The Republicans protest that the Democrats are actually the ones who are cutting education. They point to another line item in the non-partisan staff analysis ("K-12 Payment Schedule Changes Total"), which shows a $330 million delayed payment to local schools districts, pushing a local schools payment into the next biennium. But the the Democrats point out that no teacher or student would see a reduction in funding because the payment is delayed by just 24 hours.

Education advocates are with the Democrats on this point. Typically on the GOP side on ed reform issues, the League of Education Voters, for example,  issued a statement calling delayed payments, "the best available option to fund these high priority programs. Further cuts to programs for kids, families and students are a far worse alternative.”

As for higher ed, the Associated Students at the UW, the student lobby, has set out on a concerted effort to get Sen. Jim Kastama (D-25, Puyallup), one of three Democrats who voted for the Republican budget, to change his vote and go with the Democratic one.

And even if the Republicans are right—they boast, taking the $330 million into account, that their budget spends $280 million MORE [all caps theirs] on K-12 education—I'd say the Democrats are still winning. When's the last time Republicans were trying to make the case that they were spending more than Democrats? Who's framing the debate now?

Meanwhile, the Republican's frame is this:  The Democratic budget is not sustainable. The $330 million delayed payment, they say, just "kicks the can down the road" to the next biennium where there's already projected to be a $2 billion shortfall. A symbol of the GOP fiscal prudence (vs. iffy Democratic budgeting) they say, shows up in the bottom line. The Republican budget leaves $500 million in reserves—$200 million more than the Democrats.[pullquote]The state's budget ultimately translates into real public policy—and it's not sustainable to skimp on education for kids and social services for the vulnerable.[/pullquote]

But the Republican insistence on sustainability falls apart when you look at what their budget, which preserves a $20 million tax exemption for big banks while the Democrats eliminate it,  actually does. In addition to cutting K-12 and higher ed, it wipes out the Disability Lifeline (money for people with severe disabilities); it takes $42 million away from low-income housing and essential needs programs for the poor; $13 million from the state food bank program; and a devastating $202 million from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. The Republicans also yank twice as much—$85 million—from environmental programs, including a $70 million "sweep" of the toxics cleanup account.

The Republican plan also calls for suspending a $130 million state employee pension payment and shrinking employee benefits.

They may have worked out a sustainable budget on paper, but the state's budget ultimately translates into real public policy—and it's not sustainable to skimp on education for kids, social services for the vulnerable, and pension plans for retirees. The costs down the road are tremendous.

"You kick a guy off the Disability Lifeline," says Democratic senate majority leader Sen. Lisa Brown (D-3, Spokane)—who often calls the budget a policy document, "someone who's homeless, likely a vet, take away their medication, and they're going to end up in the emergency room or in jail. You haven't saved money, you've increased your costs. There's a different kind of sustainability."

Another Concrete example from the GOP proposal: Skipping the $130 pension payment would result in $147 million in near-term savings, but in the long run, according to the lefty Washington State Budget & Policy Center , suspending the payment would lead to extra pension costs of nearly $500 million over the next 25 years.

You don't get to claim you've written a sustainable budget when that budget creates an unsustainable set of public policies.