Until this year, few Pennsylvanians paid much attention to retiring state lawmakers. Until this year, retirements were rare; most lawmakers were re-elected year after year and were rightly confident in keeping their jobs as long as they wanted. The defeat of an incumbent was nearly unheard of.

But times have changed since the controversial pay-raise vote of July 7, 2005. Voter anger generated by the surprise 2 a.m. pay-raise vote and the subsequent use of unvouchered expenses by many state lawmakers has fueled a reform movement that has a better chance of bringing real change to Harrisburg than at any other time in recent years.

Last month's primary elections saw 17 incumbents, including two top Republican leaders, ousted from their Harrisburg jobs by voters. And going into the primaries, 31 other lawmakers had already announced they would not seek re-election. No doubt most refusing to stand for re-election were not interested in facing the voters and having to explain their votes for the pay raise or their use of unvouchered expenses.

Since last summer's pay-raise scandal, most voters have been paying closer attention to the way lawmakers have been doing business in Harrisburg. Exposure of the 2005 stealth pay-raise vote eventually led to closer scrutiny of the 2001 pension vote that boosted lawmakers' retirement checks by 50 percent.

The effects of that vote, which grabbed a huge surplus in the investment fund accounts, are becoming increasingly clear.

In the longer term, school districts across the state and all of the property-tax payers in those districts are bracing for a financial time bomb predicted to explode in five or six years. The ultimate damage done by Pennsylvania lawmakers' pension grab, which also produced a big pension boost for all state workers and teachers, has been estimated to be in the billions — not millions — of dollars.

Before that financial bomb explodes, voters are reminded of the overly generous pension benefits that state lawmakers have given themselves through the pending retirement of the leading lawmakers who were defeated in May's primary elections.

A recent story in a Pittsburgh newspaper noted that some ousted lawmakers will receive pension payments nearly equal to their current paychecks. For example, Sen. Robert Jubelirer, R-Altoona, will receive an estimated $105,100 a year once he leaves office. That retirement income is not much of a drop from Jubelirer's current $112,688 salary.

The other leading Republican to be ousted in the May primaries, Sen. David Brightbill of Lebanon County, will be paid an estimated $72,400 a year when he leaves office early next year.

In early 2001, lawmakers adjusted the formula used to calculate their pension benefits, while at the same time boosting their own contribution to the pension fund to 7.5 percent of their paycheck, up from a 5 percent contribution.

Because the formula used to determine pension benefits uses the most recent salary as a component of the calculation, the ill-gotten raise, despite being repealed four months after passage, has served to boost the retirement benefits for the lawmakers who chose to receive the increased pay via the use of unvouchered expenses, which are nothing more than expense reports without receipts or any other proof of increased expenditures.

For most taxpayers in the state, this extra boost for retiring lawmakers only adds insult to injury.

But on the plus side, the benefits of widespread public understanding of the over-the-top pension grab as well as the sneaky pay-raise vote should continue to build support for serious change in Harrisburg.

Most citizens would suggest that lawmakers' pensions should be more in line with the average private-sector pension plan. Others argue that there should be no pension at all for lawmakers, because such a change might discourage the job-for-life attitude and encourage more turnover as citizen lawmakers return to their former lives in the private sector after a limited number of years in Harrisburg.

The best way to bring change to Harrisburg is to replace entrenched lawmakers with new legislators committed to changing the culture of arrogance and entitlement that appears to have dominated the General Assembly (at least the legislative leaders)in recent years.

Because voters must be a driving force behind reform, the pay-raise vote and the ill-conceived pension grab are helpful in reminding Pennsylvanians of the critical need for change in Harrisburg — and to remain focused on November.