The General Assembly has another $180 million it can spend or save

The state Board of Economic Advisors added $180 million to its estimate of the revenues the state will take in next year.

That gives lawmakers another chunk of money they can either spend, save or return to taxpayers.

Sort of. The Senate anticipated the new money and has already spent it in its budget.

The House has already voted to give most of it back to taxpayers through a three-month suspension of the state gasoline tax.

And Gov. Mark Sanford, who has been pushing for a rebate for taxpayers since January, also wants to return the money to its source.

The worst choice is the Senate's. Spending all the new money repeats the mistakes of the very recent past and sets the state up for future financial problems.

While the economy was growing through the '90s, state revenues were increasing each year. So was state spending. Lawmakers spent all the money the state took in. They even overspent, depending on economic growth to make up the difference. They gave little thought to the pace at which they were growing state government.

The awakening came when the economy faltered. The revenue to pay for all the programs lawmakers had created was not there. The state's economy couldn't support the bloated state government. Years of budget cuts followed.

And they will come again if lawmakers return to spending all the money expected to come in.

It would be far better to restrict the growth of state government by limiting the size of the state budget.

Lawmakers can return some of the money to the taxpayers. They can even take credit for letting taxpayers keep some of their own money, treating it as a gift from the state. No one will mind.

Or they could save the money so the state can better weather financial troubles to come.

They can even save and spend the money at the same time. If the General Assembly spent the money to catch up on all the road and bridge work needed in the state, lawmakers would be investing in the state's infrastructure. They would create a resource the state could use for years, enhancing the economy.

Save it, invest it or let taxpayers keep it. Lawmakers should do anything but create new recurring spending programs or distribute it among all the pet projects in their districts.