Noah Torok

October 16, 2026

After years of decreased and inadequate funding, the General Assembly of Pennsylvania should increase funding for all public transit agencies before they cut services throughout the state, impacting at-risk communities that are disadvantaged by their economic status, disability, or race. In March 2025, Pittsburgh Regional Transit prepared for the worst; amid transit funding shortfalls from the Pennsylvania General Assembly, the agency announced service cuts that would have reduced its services by 35%, in addition to a 67% service cut to the ACCESS paratransit network [1]. The announcement came after funding for public transit was placed in limbo because the PA Turnpike Commission reduced its yearly contribution to transit from 450 million to 50 million dollars per fiscal year. This resulted from Act 89 of 2013, which gave the Turnpike Commission a 2022 cutoff date to lower its contribution, shifting most funding to the General Fund, which comes from taxes [2]. This change led several lawmakers to support restraints on transit funding as a means to reduce government spending, especially because many argued that providing additional funding for transit in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia would take away from investment in rural areas. Republican State Representative Jeff Olsommer asked PennDOT Secretary Michael Carroll at a legislative hearing on transit funding, “Why are my tax dollars going to Philadelphia and Pittsburgh when I don’t use them?” [3].

When Governor Shapiro gave his budget address in February 2024, he originally proposed a $282.8 million increase in transit funding [4]. However, the Republican-led State Senate rejected this proposal after it passed the Democratic-controlled State House, leading to a partisan stalemate that delayed the budget by 11 days [5]. The leadership of the state senate argued that the large addition of transit funding was an example of reckless spending amidst a period of high inflation partially caused by the secondary effects of the Covid-19 Pandemic [6]. Despite Governor Shapiro and the divided legislature agreeing to fill the funding gap with a slimmed-down amount of $80 million dollars, the framework of Act 89 continues to freeze transit funding by only considering a decades-old baseline amount. The additional 80 million only represented a fragment of the increased cost for operational funding, renovations, equipment, and new services. Concurrently, the pandemic also caused a drop in ridership and revenue for transit agencies that has yet to recover, making the stagnant state-level funding even more damaging. Ultimately, PRT was able to halt the implementation of its service cuts by transferring $110 million from its capital projects fund to its operations budget [7].

To keep transit reliable for Pennsylvanians, the General Assembly must act by establishing a permanent revenue fund that resists inflation and funding shortfalls. Currently, there are several industries that Pennsylvania does not actively collect tax revenue from, including the purchase of marijuana and the operation of skill games. Massachusetts uses a portion of its marijuana dispensary tax revenue to fund the Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority, which serves the city of Boston, and collects billions of dollars worth of taxes from the industry per year [8]. If Pennsylvania were to harness tax revenue from an untaxed industry, the commonwealth may be able to ensure reliable and equitable public transit for generations to come.

Works Cited

[1] Pittsburgh Regional Transit, “Transit Service,” Transit Cuts: What’s at Stake?, Engage PRT, accessed October 6, 2026, https://engage.rideprt.org/transit-cuts/transit-service.

[2] Pennsylvania General Assembly, Act of Nov. 25, 2013, P.L. 974, No. 89, accessed October 6, 2026, https://www.palegis.us/statutes/unconsolidated/law-information?sessYr=2013&sessInd=0&actNum=89.

[3] Ed Blazina, “Rural, Urban Areas Square Off on Transit Funding at State Budget Hearing,” Pittsburgh Union Progress, February 20, 2025, accessed October 6, 2026, https://www.unionprogress.com/2025/02/20/rural-urban-areas-square-off-on-transit-funding-at-state-budget-hearing/.

[4] Cory Sharber, “Shapiro’s Budget Plan Includes $161 Million in Funding to SEPTA Amid Budget Shortfalls,” WHYY, February 6, 2024, accessed October 6, 2026, https://whyy.org/articles/governor-josh-shapiro-transit-funding-tuesday-budget-address-septa/.

[5] Pennsylvania General Assembly, General Appropriation Act of 2025, Act of Jul. 11, 2024, P.L. 1827, No. 1A, accessed October 6, 2026, https://www.palegis.us/statutes/unconsolidated/law-information?sessYr=2025&sessInd=0&actNum=1A.

[6] Ben S. Bernanke and Olivier Blanchard, “What Caused the U.S. Pandemic-Era Inflation?,” Brookings Institution, June 13, 2023, accessed October 6, 2026, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-caused-the-u-s-pandemic-era-inflation/.

[7] Brian Nuckols, “Routes Spared, but Upgrades Nixed in Pittsburgh Regional Transit Funding Fix,” Pittsburgh’s Public Source, September 26, 2025 (updated September 29, 2025), accessed October 6, 2026, https://www.publicsource.org/pittsburgh-regional-transit-avoids-service-cuts-waterfront/.

[8] Jessica Troe, “Show Me the Money: Cannabis Revenue, Spending, and Equity in Massachusetts,” Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center, September 15, 2025, accessed October 6, 2026, https://massbudget.org/2025/09/15/show-me-the-money-cannabis-revenue-in-massachusetts/.