Steep stock market declines have slashed the value of two Pennsylvania pension funds, one for state employees, including lawmakers, and another for public school teachers. But rather than evoking sympathy, the stock market declines are reason for outrage, because taxpayers will be forced to make up for the losses.

Losses of about 30 percent recorded in 2008 could well lead to a doomsday scenario in which property tax payers would have to pay, through their local school district's contribution to the teachers' pension fund, about 29 percent of payroll expenses.

The current employers contribution is about 4 percent of payroll.

So, recent investment losses could cause a massive hit to local taxpayers.

Elected officials in Harrisburg have known that the threat of a massive hit to taxpayers was real, yet they downplayed its probability and used accounting tricks to delay the impact.

This threat of a huge tax increase for pension contributions should trigger outrage among voters and taxpayers that is every bit as vocal as the outrage that was triggered by the 2 a.m. legislative pay-raise vote of 2005.

Like the secretive pay-raise vote, the so-called pension grab of 2001 was almost certainly handled by the Legislature in a way that, if carefully examined, would be found to be unconstitutional. State lawmakers routinely ignore provisions in the state constitution mandating how bills are to be crafted and voted upon, including a requirement that bills be considered for three days in both chambers of the legislature before being voted on.

The pension-grab vote was an early example of the greed and sense of entitlement exhibited by state lawmakers in the controversial pay-raise vote a few years later. Though the public was awakened and mobilized by the pay-raise action, almost everyone was asleep when the equally scandalous pension grab occurred.

For several years, there have been dire predictions about the impact of that vote on school districts and their taxpayers. Now, with the slowing economy and plunging investments, the situation looks even worse than predicted.

It is unconscionable for lawmakers, state employees and teachers to be immune from economic swings, at least when it comes to their retirement benefits. But the traditional defined-benefit pensions that they retain shield them from market declines. Not so for the average taxpayer, whose defined-contribution 401(k) account has suffered significant declines in the past year.

Legal action should be taken to void the 2001 pension increases — 50 percent for state lawmakers and 25 percent for other state employees and teachers.

Beyond that, the pension programs for state lawmakers, state employees and public school teachers should be converted to 401(k)-type programs.

This looming crisis should provide the motivation — fueled by voter outrage and lawsuits — to make the necessary changes, even though they will be unpopular with lawmakers, teachers and other state employees.

The current reality, in which market gains from the 1990s stock market boom are greedily grabbed by pension beneficiaries in the form of larger future payments, but the market losses are shifted to taxpayers, must not stand.

It is outrageous that instead of allowing the pension fund surpluses of the late 1990s to grow and act as a cushion for a future market downturn, state lawmakers grabbed the surpluses for themselves and other state employees. And that outrage is amplified by the fact that state employees are protected from investment losses, while, at the same time, taxpayers — who are not immune to market declines — will be forced to make up for investment losses.

This Harrisburg mentality mirrors the greed exhibited recently on Wall Street, where million-dollar bonuses were paid when times were good, but taxpayers are forced to keep the big banks alive now that their risky investments have imploded.

Taxpayers should begin making noise about this scandal at every school board meeting across the state. They also should demand action by Harrisburg — which will occur only if lawmakers understand that inaction will cost them their jobs.