Barring a last-minute change of heart, Utah lawmakers will cut personal income taxes by $70 million during next week's special session.

For a married couple, the tax cut translates into about $48 in 2006. For a single person, it's about $24. If this tax cut passes — and all indications are it will — lawmakers will have given a total of $160 million in cuts this year, which also includes $20 million for targeted business tax reductions and $70 million for reducing the state sales tax on food by 2 percentage points come Jan. 1.

The other piece of business the Legislature will consider is transportation funding, whether to allow the state or counties to increase sales taxes to fund transportation improvements. It may seem a bit counterintuitive to cut income taxes and nearly halve the sales tax on food, all while allowing voters to raise their sales taxes for transportation projects. But transportation projects are vital to the state's future.

The riddle of all tax reform is to ensure cuts are fair and that tax policies make sense. For the most part, state lawmakers are on the right track this time. It's hard to justify not cutting taxes after state auditors announced a $380 million surplus. But it's also hard to justify not investing adequately in long-term needs.

Utah has some legitimate state needs. Lawmakers need to invest in the institutions that educate and train the future work force. Schools and colleges need to be able to attract and retain the best educators. This is particularly true in public education, where school districts are facing significant numbers of teacher retirements.

Higher education must be recognized for the role it will play in building Utah's economy. It needs the resources to address work force-specific labor training needs, which include certificate training programs ranging from trades all the way to physician specialists. Some sources say more than two-thirds of new jobs will require some post-secondary education.

Amid record surpluses, it would be unconscionable not to fund basic dental and vision services for low-income people with disabilities. Add to this the needs of people with disabilities who have waited years for funding of community-based services.

Surely every department of state government has legitimate needs, if not a wish list. We're not suggesting state government be all things to all people. But we are mindful of years of public opinion polls that consistently identify education as Utahns' top spending priority. People have repeatedly said that instead of cutting taxes, legislators should invest more in education.

It's understood that the $70 million set aside for tax reduction is all but a done deal. But with a surplus that is more than substantial, there should be long, deliberate debate before taxes are cut further.