Out-of-control costs threaten to destroy public transportation in Pittsburgh. In the private sector, these issues are being dealt with, but that's not the case in the public sector.

A stunning report, conducted by the Economy League of Southwestern Pennsylvania and released last week, revealed that the Port Authority of Allegheny County (PAT) is paying about four times as much in retiree health benefits as Philadelphia's much-larger transit agency.

The cost analysis revealed that PAT will this year spend $29.2 million on health care for retirees while the much-larger Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) will spend $7.3 million.

The Economy League's report, which took two years to complete, reveals that PAT's union drivers and retirees are the beneficiaries of some of the most generous benefits for transit workers in the entire United States. But with an economy lagging most other parts of the country, this region simply cannot survive if public employees' wages and benefits are not brought in line to reflect the region's population and wealth.

Riders of PAT buses and taxpayers alike have a right to be angry at the millions of dollars being spent unnecessarily. Most people appreciate the value of public transportation and its importance for lower-income workers to get to and from work. But a mountain of evidence of lax cost controls and give-away-the-store agreements for wages and benefits does not build support for additional money for public transportation.

With generous provisions for early retirement, PAT now pays benefits to 2,098 retirees. SEPTA, with three times as many active workers as PAT, has just 1,472 retirees receiving health benefits.

Some years ago, SEPTA instituted rules that cut off health benefits after 50 months. Presumably, the idea was that Medicare is available to all those who did not retire at an unusually early age.

The Economy League study revealed that a PAT worker who retires before reaching age 65, when Medicare benefits are available, costs the transit agency about $18,000 a year.

Taxpayer anger might first be directed at PAT workers and their union for burdening the agency with such high legacy costs. But the management at PAT, specifically earlier boards of directors that signed off on these deals, are at fault for allowing costs to escalate so far beyond other, similar agencies'.

The news about PAT's outsized benefits came on the same day last week that a Philadelphia newspaper revealed that the Philadelphia Parking Authority had doubled its payroll since Republicans took over six years ago. The newspaper reported that 20 authority employees now make over $100,000. The executive director, a longtime Republican ward leader in the city, is paid $194,500.

Gov. Ed Rendell reportedly was stunned. For Pennsylvania's taxpayers it might be stunning, but not surprising — it's just another example of politically connected employees of a public agency lining their pockets.

From the state legislature's controversial 2005 pay-raise vote and the 2001 pension grab for lawmakers and public school teachers to the extravagant spending and bonus payments at the state's student loan agency (Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency), state taxpayers have been hit with a steady stream of self-serving behavior and wasteful spending of taxpayers' dollars.

With the state Attorney General's office investigating nearly $4 million being spent by party leaders in Harrisburg to reward their legislative staffers for what appears to have been purely political, re-election work, it's becoming increasingly clear that Pennsylvania needs more investigators and auditors uncovering waste and abuse. The state also needs fewer people in so-called public service jobs whose primary interest is self-enrichment.

Reports of these abuses are coming from cities outside Butler County—Pittsburgh, Harrisburg and Philadelphia—but they involve money that is paid by all state taxpayers. The outrage and demands for change should be just as strong here as elsewhere in the state.

Voters here and across the sate should demand that their local representatives in Harrisburg push for more change and accountability. And if significant change is not seen within the next year, voters should reject more entrenched incumbents in next year's elections.