A statue of Thomas Jefferson greets visitors at the main lobby at the Jefferson Hotel in Richmond. (Steve Helber/AP)

Phil Andrews served on the Montgomery County Council from 1998 to 2014. He was the lead sponsor of the county's public-financing law.

The Potomac River separates increasingly different states of mind about big money in politics.

Virginia is a sanctuary for fat cats, the only East Coast state where individuals, corporations, unions and political action committees can contribute unlimited funds to a candidate, an incentive for politicians to cater to wealthy individuals and interest groups. In Virginia's gubernatorial race, Democratic nominee Ralph Northam and Republican nominee Ed Gillespie have received many contributions exceeding $100,000. Northam supports establishing contribution limits; neither candidate supports public financing of campaigns.

Maryland and the District corral big donors, limiting how much individuals and groups may contribute to a candidate. Maryland restricted how much an individual could donate to candidates overall until 2014, when the Supreme Court ruled that aggregate limits violate the First Amendment. That same year, Republican Larry Hogan became the first governor elected in Maryland using public financing.

Without public financing, mega-donors with megaphones drown out the voices of the people in the public square and distort public policy — including in the region's local races in which development interests and public-employee unions, whose fortunes depend on favorable decisions by local officials, historically have provided the lion's share of campaign funds.

In 2013, the Maryland General Assembly passed legislation enabling counties to establish public-financing systems for county elections. Virginia's state lawmakers need to do likewise.

Montgomery County and Howard County approved public financing for county council and executive candidates. Montgomery's system is underway for the 2018 election; Howard's begins in 2022. In Prince George's County, council member Mary A. Lehman (D-Laurel) is drafting legislation, and a grass-roots coalition is seeking the support of County Executive Rushern L. Baker III (D) and a majority of the council to establish public financing for the 2022 election.

In the District, council member David Grosso (I-At Large) introduced a public-financing bill in March, the Fair Elections Act of 2017. It's co-sponsored by a supermajority of council members, which is crucial because Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) hasn't committed to it. Enactment would improve public confidence that procurement decisions and other official actions aren't influenced by big donations.

Small donations are especially rewarded under Montgomery's public-financing system. Council candidates receive $200 in public funds for the first $50 given by each county resident; executive candidates receive $300. As a contribution approaches the $150 limit, the ratio of the public match decreases, encouraging candidates to continuously broaden their base among county residents, the people directly affected by their decisions. This should increase voter turnout, which was a paltry 17.5 percent in the 2014 county primary.

The Montgomery County Council has appropriated $11 million for public financing for the 2018 election. The amount of public funding a candidate may receive is sufficient to run a viable campaign. Notably, there's no limit on how much a candidate may raise from small individual donations and spend overall. However, candidates using public funding can't accept contributions from PACs, corporations, unions or political parties, must limit individual contributions to $150, and can't give or lend their campaign more than $6,000.

Although Montgomery voters' approval in 2016 of retroactive term limits ensures four new council members and a new executive in 2018, public financing enables many candidates to run competitive campaigns without funding from special interests or big donors or having to self-finance. Twenty-nine of 42 council candidates and three of five county executive candidates are seeking public funding (see marylandreporter.com/category/election-2018/). To qualify, they must meet thresholds that require many small donations from county residents.

Public financing should be accompanied by open primaries and the elimination of gerrymandering to maximize incentives for politicians to put the public interest first. Democrats in Annapolis and Republicans in Richmond have used gerrymandering of congressional and legislative districts to disempower the other party's voters. Maryland and the District use closed party primaries, which exclude the approximately 770,000 people registered as unaffiliated or nonpartisan; Virginia's primaries are open to all voters, but parties can require a voter to sign a party affiliation pledge. Closed primaries, particularly in gerrymandered or otherwise one-sided districts, encourage partisanship and impel politicians to act as if only primary voters matter, producing polarization, unresponsive government, public disgust and term limits.

Public-financing advances the public interest by countering fat-cat financing, increasing political competition and voter choice, and empowering the people. Maryland and the District are moving forward. Will Virginia?