A little noticed news item last week should have Pennsylvanians worried. Fitch, a credit-rating agency, downgraded the state’s $11 billion of outstanding bonds to AA, from AA-plus, mostly because of the state’s public pension crisis.

For years, there have been warnings about Pennsylvania’s underfunded pension crisis — now estimated at $47 billion. The state’s two large pension funds, one for public school teachers and one for all state employees including lawmakers, are dramatically underfunded.

In downgrading the state’s credit rating, Fitch focused on the failure to enact pension reform, a structural deficit and a depleted reserve fund as reasons. But the pension crisis was front and center in the report.

The report from Fitch said, “For fiscal 2014, the commonwealth estimates the general fund share of pension costs will increase 46.2 percent or $511.2 million, to $1.6 billion. This represents 80 percent of the total spending increase in the budget.”

And the report contains more bad news, noting that general fund increases to the pension funds will increase at double digit rates until 2018, without serious pension reform.

It looks as though almost all the revenue growth coming to the Department of Revenue in coming years will be diverted to the state’s two pension funds. That means even if tax revenues increase, there will be no additional money for education, economic development, tax reduction, help for seniors or transportation.

Pennsylvania is not alone in facing a pension crisis. Other states, notably Illinois, New Jersey and California face huge pension gaps.

In Illinois, Gov. Pat Quinn is threatening to stop paychecks to state lawmakers and he plans to call them back to work for a special session to deal with the state’s $100 billion pension gap. Gov. Tom Corbett should be taking a similarly tough stance.

Public employee pensions are threatening many states and cities. Detroit’s filing for bankruptcy protection last week is certainly related to its underfunded pension crisis.

Past efforts to resolve Pennsylvania’s pension crisis were mostly accounting tricks to kick the can down the road.

This problem should have been addressed in 2002, the year after the state lawmakers voted themselves a 50 percent pension increase and gave all other state employees, plus public school teachers, a 25 percent pension increase.

At the time of the so-called 2001 pension grab, stock market gains from the dot-com bubble had produced a surplus in the state’s two big pension funds. Rather than leave the surplus as a cushion against future stock market downturns, the lawmakers raided it. Within months of those unwarranted pension increases passed by lawmakers, the stock market crashed, dropping the pension funds’ value. Subsequent market crashes, including the 2008-09 financial crisis, only worsened the pension crisis.

The Fitch report says the state’s problems “signal an inability or unwillingness on the part of political leaders to make difficult fiscal decision.” Reading that statement, there is an obvious error — there are no political leaders (at least not many) in Pennsylvania, only elected officials who have failed to do their jobs.

Lawmakers, when they finally face the pension crisis, must craft a solution that involves everyone — taxpayers, current beneficiaries, possibly even some current retirees. Retirees should be the least affected, but they should contribute something to to solution — especially those enjoying higher benefits from the 2001 pension increase.

Current employees should face increased contributions into the pension fund and possibly changes in retirement ages and pension eligibility rules as well. Any solution should share the pain, so that the entire burden does not fall on taxpayers.

Elected officials have not been honest about the seriousness of the pension crisis; the Fitch downgrade is evidence of that.

Taxpayers and voters should pay attention to what lawmakers propose to resolve the $47 billion funding gap. It should be a shared-sacrifice plan, even if lawmakers and their political supporters don’t like it.