A decade ago, a coalition of a Democratic majority in the legislature and a Republican governor, M. Jodi Rell, changed the way state campaigns are paid for in Connecticut. The state started funding campaigns, meaning corporate, labor and other special-interest groups could no longer buy influence by bankrolling candidates.

Back then, many Republican lawmakers opposed the program on philosophical grounds. It wasn’t the job of government — meaning taxpayers — to pay for campaigns, went the thinking.

What a difference 10 years can make; today it is state Democrats who have the “Citizens’ Election Program” (CEP) under attack by undermining it through loopholes and, most recently, suggesting withdrawing its funding. It is Republican leaders calling for it to be reformed and preserved.

Providing for publicly financed campaigns was one of the reforms passed in the wake of the corruption scandal that drove Gov. John G. Rowland out of office in 2004 and into federal prison for a year. The legislature also passed rules prohibiting candidates for governor from accepting donations from companies doing business with the state.

Unfortunately, if special interest money still finds its way into the process, it undermines the reforms. That has been happening in recent elections.

In 2013, the Democratic majority in the General Assembly lifted limits on how much money state political parties can give candidates, including those participating in the CEP. Instead of giving directly to a candidate, those currying favor can give to the parties, which passes the money onto the candidates. That conflicts with the program’s intent.

For most state Senate and House races, the parties provide little additional cash, as the CEP well funds the campaigns. However, Democrats in 2014 demonstrated what they could do with the loophole when they had a particularly favored candidate. In that election the Democratic Central Committee spent about $200,000 to help elect state Sen. Ted Kennedy Jr., the 53-year-old son of the former U.S. senator from Massachusetts. Kennedy had accepted about $80,000 in public financing.

In that 2014 election, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy also exploited a loophole, directing money donated to the state party under federal campaign spending guidelines, which are far more lax than state rules. By using the federal rules, Democrats were able to solicit donations from state contractors banned under the state election laws. Technically, money collected under the federal program can be used only for candidates for federal office or to get out the vote.

Malloy was a state candidate. However, by promoting campaign advertising as the get-out-the-vote variety, even though it prominently featured the governor, Democrats were able to steer the cash to his re-election effort, most egregiously $250,000 for a mass mailing in the closing days of the election.

Republicans complained to the State Elections Enforcement Commission, which is trying to investigate, but the state Democratic Party is attempting to quash the probe in state Superior Court.

Republicans have a particular interest in trying to save the CEP from such abuse. Democrats control the House and Senate with sizable majorities. Without the CEP, incumbent Democrats enjoy a huge advantage because it is far easier for incumbents to raise money.

State Sen. Michael McLachlan wants to fix the law. He is the ranking Republican on the legislature’s Government Administration and Elections Committee. McLachlan calls for closing the loopholes, while reducing the expenditures candidates receive for campaigns.

Republicans making a strong push for repairing the program, while trimming the money spent on it, could leave Democrats in an awkward political position and on their heels in 2016.

Paul Choiniere is the editorial page editor.

Twitter: @Paul_Choiniere

p.choiniere@theday.com