After narrowly failing last year, advocates are trying again to make Maryland one of a handful of states that publicly fund campaigns for office, a reform they believe will diminish the influence of moneyed special interests.

"I think politicians should be beholden to the public, not to big donors," said Sen. Paul G. Pinsky, a Prince George's County Democrat who sponsored legislation the past two years that would provide state funds to political candidates who volunteer to forgo most funding from private donors.

A big donor "gets responded to more quickly than someone who doesn't give," he said. "That's a reality, and I don't think it should be that way. There ought to be a level playing field."

Bills on the issue are due for hearings in the Senate and the House of Delegates this week. Despite failing by one vote in the Senate last year, the proposal is no sure thing. Many powerful lawmakers oppose the idea, saying it would waste public funds without any certain benefits.

"Unfortunately, no matter how much you try to reform the system, I don't think you can legislate morality," said Sen. Thomas "Mac" Middleton, a Charles County Democrat who voted against the bill last year. He said he tells potential donors at fundraisers that they "get as much for being here as if you weren't here."

For many progressives and government watchdog groups, public financing of elections is a reform to cure all evils they see in the current political system. When candidates can win elections without taking any money from donors, their independence opens the door to long-needed policy changes, the advocates argue.

But critics deride such efforts, saying they work against the right of individuals to financially support candidates of their choosing and often lead to unintended consequences that destabilize the political process.

Under the proposals being considered this week, candidates who choose the public financing route would qualify for funding by getting contributions of $5 or more from at least 282 people, a step designed to show electoral viability. Senate candidates would get $50,000 for contested primary and general election races. House candidates would get $40,000.

The state would increase those funds by as much as two times, depending on how much privately financed opponents raise.

The legislation would establish a $7.5 million-a-year fund that would be administered by an "election financing commission." The money would come not from tax dollars but revenue from unclaimed property that reverts annually to the state.

Advocates for the bill point to Maine and Arizona, two states that have operated with public financing for years. They say lawmakers in those states were willing to enact mega-reforms such as universal health care because they are not beholden to donors. Nearly half the legislators in those states now accept public financing, according to the bill's boosters in Maryland.

Unlike many issues in Annapolis, the feelings of lawmakers about publicly financed campaigns do not fall along party lines. The measure's past supporters include some of the legislature's most conservative Republicans, such as Sen. Andy Harris and Senate Minority Leader David R. Brinkley. Numerous Democrats oppose it, most notably Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller.

Opponents say there's no taint to campaign contributions as long as they come with full disclosure and no promises of any favors. The Supreme Court has recognized political donations as a form of speech, and critics have said any act to limit them or diminish their importance goes against that right.

Some lawmakers, including Miller, said the state can't afford to pay $7.5 million a year for bumper stickers and lawn signs for candidates many people might disagree with.

Still, despite the opposition, advocates say they hope this will be the year they prevail. Votes on the legislation were delayed until just before the end of the 90-day session in 2007. Fearing the bill wouldn't reach the Senate floor, Pinsky "threw a hail Mary," in the words of one supporter, and offered it as an amendment to an unrelated bill.

Miller responded by promising it would be voted upon in the chamber, and that afternoon, it failed by one vote.

In the past, lawmakers have said campaign finance reform is the one of the toughest issues to debate because every elected official is an expert, leading to strong opinions and personal conflicts.

Del. Jon S. Cardin, a Baltimore County Democrat who sponsored the legislation in the House, said it's good policy to allow people to run for office without having to accept special interest money. Still, Cardin said that he wasn't certain he would opt for public financing if the option were available.

"I would consider it," he said. "I'm not married to the idea that I would participate, but I think it's an important option for people to have."

bradley.olson@baltsun.com