While the final details remained to be worked out between state lawmakers and Gov. Ed Rendell over a 2005-06 budget, one thing was certain: The estimated $440 million budget surplus accumulated over the past year is gone.

Rendell's first target for much of the surplus is restoration of proposed spending cuts to Medicare. Though most people likely support such a use for surplus funds, other uses - like a rumored $10,000 wage hike for state lawmakers - are less likely to meet taxpayer approval.

Still, the issue of what to do with a budget surplus is something to consider, given that 34 states are projected to collect more revenues than anticipated this year, due to general economic recovery.

What those states do with their budget surpluses will vary. Some will restore earlier spending cuts and others will return the money to taxpayers. Most will do some of both, but at the discretion of lawmakers,

Current law in Pennsylvania requires that 25 percent of a budget surplus be moved into the state's Rainy Day Fund. This is a proper and prudent thing to do.

But why not mandate how the rest of the surplus is spent.

Given the many constituencies served by state lawmakers, there is no shortage of worthy causes looking for increased spending. No matter how large the budget surplus, funding requests will always outstrip the money to pay for them.

While taxpayers are notorious for wanting more government services than they are willing to pay for, there is a movement building in some states to control spending by law.

A recent Wall Street Journal editorial described efforts in 20 states to enact what is generally called Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) laws.

Colorado is viewed as having the model TABOR law, which limits the growth in state spending to the rate of inflation plus the growth in the state's population. The spending-restraint law in Colorado, enacted 12 years ago, has meant that per-capita spending there has grown more slowly than in any other state over the past six years.

The Journal's editorial also noted that in six of the last nine years, Coloradans have received some $3.2 billion in tax refund checks - averaging about $3,000 per family.

Evidence of this grass-roots movement is clear. Signatures are being collected in Ohio to put a TABOR law on the books, and Maine voters approved a tough spending-limit law earlier this year.

While most taxpayers in Pennsylvania assume the fate of a budget surplus, or spending growth in general, must be left to the whims of lawmakers, taxpayers'-rights groups in other states have proven that spending growth can be controlled - by law.

The time is overdue for a spending-restraint movement in Harrisburg. And, it would be appropriate for state Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, who has said he believes the surplus should be returned to the voters, to lead the charge in Harrisburg.

As popular as a spending-restraint law might be with taxpayers, they are anathema to lawmakers - who are in the business of granting favors with other people's money. The Journal's editorial noted that opposition to spending limits is fierce and that "government employee unions and corporate lobbyists are expected to spend $10 million to neuter TABOR in Colorado, and even more to defeat Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's 'Live Within Our Means' budget initiative in California."

So, a few key lawmakers are needed to encourage the movement, but taxpayers and voters are where the power lies when it comes to controlling state spending. It is time for taxpayer groups to mobilize for a TABOR law in Pennsylvania.