Pennsylvania has joined the ranks of US Airways, General Motors and other large organizations facing huge unfunded pension liabilities. The financial time bomb ticking in Pennsylvania is primarily the result of two events: legislators quietly giving themselves and all state workers increased pension benefits, and the significant decline in stock market investment returns since 2000, when the tech bubble burst.

Though it offers little solace to property owners facing major tax increases in coming years, Pennsylvania is not alone in its pension woes. This week's issue of BusinessWeek magazine features a cover story titled "Sink Hole: How public pension promises are draining state and city budgets." The extensive story outlined the problems facing many school districts, cities and states - with Illinois and California being featured as having the worst problems.

The scope of the crisis is hard to fathom. The magazine article states that "more than 14 million public servants and 6 million retirees are owed $2.37 trillion by more than 2,000 states, cities and agencies."

In a front-page article in the May 31 edition of the Butler Eagle, reporter Shari Berg described the dire situation in Pennsylvania. Butler County Controller Jack McMillin became aware of the state's looming financial crisis after looking over some school district budget figures during the debate over the Act 72 plan to reduce property taxes with slot machine revenue. McMillin noted that a tipoff to the crisis was the fact that one of the 10 exceptions to voter approval for school district tax hikes described in the fine print of Act 72 was for big jumps in payments to state pension programs.

Clearly, Harrisburg lawmakers are aware of the crisis they helped create when they gave themselves and all state employees increased pension benefits. Following the dramatic stock market gains of the late 1990s, the state's pension fund had been earning enough on strong investment returns that payments had been unnecessary for a while and a surplus had developed. But instead of allowing that surplus to remain and provide a cushion for future market fluctuations, lawmakers took the surplus and gave it away in the form of a nearly 50 percent increase in pension benefits to all government employees. Soon after lawmakers boosted the pension promises, the market sank.

In hindsight, it is clear that the lawmakers did precisely the wrong thing at precisely the wrong time. McMillin properly noted that "there should have been some form of minimal contribution each year, even despite a good performance in the stock market."

McMillin and several school board members from across the county noted in the Eagle's article that district contributions to the pension funds will nearly double over the next few years. And, they are predicted to more than double again by the time the 2012-13 school year arrives. School districts will have to find ways to fund these dramatic increases, amounting to millions of dollars in some cases.

Costs will have to be cut and taxes will have to be increased. To most property owners in the county, the tax increases will be troubling - especially because they are directly due to ill-advised promises made by state lawmakers in boosting pension benefits well above the level found in the private sector. To other taxpayers, the rate hikes will simply be unaffordable.

In describing the general situation, BusinessWeek's writers could have been talking about Pennsylvania in particular. After mentioning the negative impact of the 2000-02 bear market on pension funds, the article noted that the other factor creating the crisis was "just foolishness: a lathering of billions of dollars worth of new promises to workers in flush days. It was a familiar mistake: Public-pension provisions are determined by elected officials, and civil servants vote. Legislators have a long history of making such expensive upgrades to already generous plans."

The first reaction most taxpayers would have is that those ill-conceived pension promises should be rescinded. Lawmakers made promises that should not have been made, and they were made without voter input or approval. But, as BusinessWeek noted and McMillin concurred, state constitutions don't allow for these pension promises, no matter how unaffordable, to be taken back.

There is no real solution to the public pension crisis. It has been looming for years, and it was made much worse by recent actions of state lawmakers to promise enhanced benefits. The likely outcome appears to involve a combination of two unpopular actions - cost cutting (and service reductions) by school districts, cities and states, and inevitable tax increases.

When property taxes jump due to increased pension payments for teachers and other government employees, much of the wrath will be directed at school boards. The real culprits, however, are the lawmakers in Harrisburg who approved the unaffordable and ill-timed benefit increases to themselves and all government employees - to the tune of creating a $1 billion shortfall.

Voters should not forget who turned the pension problem into a pension crisis. State lawmakers created this crisis, and they should be forced to make some hard decisions to mollify its impact on taxpayers.