For years, government watchdogs in New York have accused the state of having lax campaign donor laws -- allowing a handful of deep-pocketed interests to fund elections. Their hope has long been a system of publicly financed campaigns, in which low-dollar donations are matched with taxpayer money. 

But as the system is just starting to get off the ground, a measure that will soon head to Gov. Kathy Hochul's desk could make changes good-government organizations worry will go against the intent of the law of creating more competitive elections. 

Supporters of changes -- including top Democrats in the Legislature -- argue these are necessary in order to set a bar for viable, quality candidates who are fielding bona fide efforts. 

And the changes are pending as New York City's system of public campaign financing has come under scrutiny after six people were indicted last week on charges of using straw donors in an attempt to game the system. 

How the public financing system for campaigns ultimately shakes out could have a long-lasting effect on elections, which candidates appear before voters on the ballot and how the state is governed in the coming years. 

As the legislative session drew to a close last month, lawmakers advanced a measure that would make it easier for candidates to receive public matching money from larger donations. The current system, taking effect this election cycle, would match small donations ranging from $5 to $250. 

The Democratic-led Legislature wants public matching money on the first $250 in contributions up to the maximum limit for a state race -- $18,000 for statewide races, $10,000 for the state Senate and $6,000 for the state Assembly. 

For Reinvent Albany's John Kaehny, the pending measure would likely aid incumbents. 

"The idea is to increase choice by incentivizing people to run," Kaehny said. "Of course, incumbents don't want to have competitive races."

Kaehny's good-government group, along with similar ethics organizations in New York, are urging Hochul to veto the changes.  

The proposed changes to the matching plan has drawn a Republican rebuke as well.

"I certainly don't think it's an improvement," said Assembly Minority Leader Will Barclay, a critic of publicly financed elections. "The idea that we're supposed to give the person on the street more voice in politics by letting the small donations have a bigger impact on campaigns, but allowing people to still make large campaign donations, undermines what they claim the system is about in the first place."

Top Democrats, including Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie, have defended the potential change as a necessary adjustment. In a Capital Tonight interview last month, Heastie said lawmakers believed the current system could lead to abuse from less serious candidates.  

"We just want to make sure that if the government is going to pay for elections that these are candidates who have real and genuine support in the communities," Heastie said. "We just wanted to be more judicious with the state funding."

And as the fledgling public campaign finance system takes shape on the statewide level, New York City's system is once again being wracked by a straw donor case. Prosecutors last week indicted six people on charges they sought to pump up contributions by allegedly using fraudulent donations. 

Kaehny, however, pointed to protections in place meant to guard against fraud at the statewide level, including audits of how the money is raised and spent. 

"We do think that public campaign finance matching funds are a hugely hard target and people trying to scam them, get caught," he said.