In a trial seeking to strike down some of the state's campaign contribution limits, a former Anchorage assemblyman said Monday that he once lost a state Senate race by several dozen votes to an incumbent because he couldn't raise enough money to counter criticism that he was corrupt.

The ex-assemblyman, engineer Bob Bell, 73, testified that some voters felt he was a member of the "Corrupt Bastards Club" because of news coverage about the disgraced oil-field company Veco Corp. offering campaign contributions for him and contracts for his firm in the 1990s if he would support construction of a private prison in South Anchorage, which Veco hoped to build. Bell told a reporter about the Veco offer when he ran for the Alaska Senate in 2012, and said he turned it down — but didn't report it to police or the FBI, something he said he wasn't required to do because the offer wasn't tied to Assembly votes.

The Corrupt Bastards Club was the name chosen by a group of lawmakers who had received large contributions from Veco officials before the FBI's probe into bribery by Veco went public in 2006. The company is now defunct and its main official, Bill Allen, served time in federal prison.

Bell said he would have beaten longtime Anchorage Democratic senator Hollis French in 2012 if he'd been able to raise more money in the tight race, which he lost by 59 votes. His testimony was meant to underscore the plaintiffs' argument that Alaska's restrictive contribution limit hurt challengers trying to oust established lawmakers.

Bell said he was prevented from raising more because individual donors could give only $500 — one of the lowest annual limits in the country. Bell received 138 of those maximum donations.

An Anchorage assemblyman in the 1990s who had not held state office, Bell spent much of his money fending off an opponent in the primary election — a problem French didn't face. And he couldn't raise enough money when he faced French in the general election, preventing him from responding to a barrage of attacks in the campaign's closing days, he said.

"There is absolutely no doubt in my mind I would have won the race," said Bell, if he'd been able to raise more money.

The assertion was made during a federal civil trial that is expected to wrap up Tuesday after more than a week of arguments and testimony. The plaintiffs — three people and a Republican Party District in Anchorage — say the limits restricted their ability to donate to Republican candidates last year, and therefore limited their free-speech rights.

In their lawsuit against the Alaska Public Offices Commission, they argue that Alaska's contribution limits are so low they trigger "danger signs" that the U.S. Supreme Court warned about in a 2006 case that struck down contribution limits in Vermont.

But the state points out that the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which includes Alaska, has said the Supreme Court was divided on that decision, leaving no majority opinion or litmus test that trumps the 9th Circuit's own approach, which says "important" state interests must be considered when weighing whether limits are too restrictive. The state argues that one of its important interests is preventing corruption, and that lower limits help have that effect.

Though French raised more than $220,000, the state argued that Bell also raised a large sum of money, about $150,000.

State attorney Margaret Paton-Walsh also said there were dozens of other factors at play in Bell's race besides just money, as there is for any race. It's also unclear if Bell actually ran out of money, as he claimed in court on Monday, because there appears to be a "reporting glitch" in his campaign finance paperwork, said Paton-Walsh.

"It's complete speculation that it was a fundraising issue," she said.

The trial, with a host of politicians, consultants and watchdog groups testifying, has shined a light on the power of money in politics.

Bell, chief executive of engineering firm F. Robert Bell and Associates, said he entered the 2012 race reluctantly and late. He did so only after John Minge, former CEO of BP Alaska and his engineering firm's biggest client, called him and urged him to run.

Bell had been weighing the idea and listening to supporters, but the call from Minge, a fishing buddy, was the "straw" that persuaded him to run.

"I turned to Candace and said, 'I'll have to do this,' " said Bell, referring to his wife.

"He was a friend saying I want to encourage you to do this," Bell said. "There was no insinuation other than a friend calling and saying, 'You're the kind of person with the political philosophy we need and we need you to do this.' "

That philosophy, Bell told a reporter outside the courtroom, was Bell's strong opposition to a 2007 oil-production tax supported by Democrats and then-Gov. Sarah Palin that increased the state's tax rate when oil prices rose. That tax was facing opposition from Republicans, then-Gov. Sean Parnell and the oil industry, and was ultimately set aside by the Legislature in 2013.

In the closing days of his race against French, Bell said he had no money to fend off a barrage of negative press, including an article in the Anchorage Daily News, now the Alaska Dispatch News, in which he had told a reporter that in 1996 he had been approached by Veco executives offering fundraising help and business contracts if he would support their efforts to build a private prison.

"I said, 'No, I can't, a vast majority of people in South Anchorage don't want that and I can't do that,' " he said.

On the witness stand Monday, Bell said he did nothing illegal by not reporting the Veco offer because the support the Veco executives sought was for his public advocacy for the prison.

"It was not a bribe needing reporting, because there was no action for the Assembly (to take)," Bell said. "They weren't asking me to vote one way or another."

Bell told the court he couldn't respond to that attack and others as the election approached, and the negative impressions took their toll.

Also testifying Monday, for the state and its campaign contribution limits, was former Democratic Anchorage Rep. Eric Croft, now an Anchorage Assemblyman, who drafted the initiative in 2003 to return the state's individual contribution limit to $500. That limit had been set in 1996, but lawmakers raised it to $1,000 in 2003. Voters lowered it back to $500 in 2006 by a 3-to-1 margin.

Croft, 51, said he felt that restoring the prior limits would reduce the risk of temptation for lawmakers to act in favor of donors over the public interest.

Often, the effect of campaign contributions can have subtle influences over lawmakers, Croft said.

Croft recounted a phone call from Mike Gordon in 2001, the former owner of Chilkoot Charlie's and now a Republican running for an Anchorage House seat.

Croft, a state representative then, said Gordon had donated to his campaign. Sometime later, Gordon called and asked Croft to vote against an alcohol tax increase that could hurt Koot's.

Croft said there was nothing wrong with what Gordon had done. But Croft, who said he would support the tax, said Gordon never gave him another campaign contribution.

"It was clear if you don't vote the way someone wants, you won't get their continued contribution," Croft said.

Croft said increasing the maximum amount a person can give will make it harder for lawmakers to turn such requests down.