With their party’s reputation on ethics under attack, a pair of Democrats is seeking to sever ties between earmarks and campaign contributions — a link that was underscored in the latest controversy regarding the now-shuttered lobbying firm PMA.

Reps. Paul W. Hodes of New Hampshire and Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona introduced legislation Wednesday that would ban lawmakers from taking contributions from companies, executives or lobbyists for whom they have secured earmarks. PMA successfully sought defense earmarks from prominent Democratic lawmakers to whom its associates had also given campaign contributions.

“It is wrong that legislators request earmarks for companies or organizations and then turn around and take contributions from them,” Hodes said. “It isn’t against the law now, but it should be. We need to hold Congress to a higher standard.”

The legislation would prohibit contributions from the president, chief executive officer, chief operating officer, or chief financial officer of a company seeking earmarks.

Hodes said the legislation was not in direct response to the PMA controversy but part of a natural progression in earmark reform that began when Democrats took control of Congress in 2006 and promised “to drain the swamp.”

Appeasing Uneasy Lawmakers

“Certainly the issue is lively right now,” Hodes said. “But it has been all along.”

While it is unlikely that the legislation will advance, it might appeal to those lawmakers who are uneasy over PMA, which successfully lobbied lawmakers, including House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman John P. Murtha , D-Pa., for earmarks. PMA executives and their families contributed heavily to Murtha in the last election cycle.

Republicans have seized on the PMA issue, arguing that it shows how Democrats have abused the earmarks process to help campaign contributors. One persistent earmark critic, Jeff Flake , R-Ariz., has repeatedly forced the House to vote this year on privileged resolutions asking the Ethics Committee to look into ties between PMA and the lawmakers who secured earmarks for it.

Winning Over More Democrats

While the House has repeatedly tabled the Flake resolution, the Democratic House leadership has grown concerned that an increasing number of its members have supported the measure. The first time the resolution came up in February, 17 Democrats voted against the motion to table, or kill, the measure. The last time it came up, early this month, 27 Democrats voted against the motion to table. Among those lawmakers who voted for the Flake resolution was Hodes, who said PMA “was the appropriate subject of an ethics investigation.”

Democratic leaders, meanwhile, have recently sought to convince their rank and file that if Republicans have problems with Murtha or others tied to PMA, they should lodge their complaints directly with the House Ethics Committee or the newly formed Office of Congressional Ethics.

Nadeam Elshami, a spokesman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif, said that rather than sponsoring House resolutions, Flake “should be using the ethics process to move forward.”