ANNAPOLIS — During his 28 years as a state legislator, Sen. George C. Edwards can recall voting against the state budget only a handful of times.

That's not to say he favors everything in the massive document. It merely means that the good outweighs the bad when he's casted a green vote, explained Edwards (R-Dist. 1) of Grantsville.

Republicans walk a fine line with their budget votes nearly every year, particularly under Democratic governors.

Supporters expose themselves to criticism from fiscal conservatives who say the annual spending plans are bloated. Opponents run the risk of being cast as obstructionists who object to universally popular programs such as school construction and public safety.

The balancing act becomes even more delicate in an election year, when every vote is scrutinized and a possible source of campaign fodder.

"It sometimes borders on irresponsible to not vote for the budget," said Sen. Donald F. Munson, who, along with Edwards, makes up one-half of the Republican membership on the Senate Budget and Taxation Committee. "There is so much in that budget that applies to people's everyday lives."

But House Minority Whip Christopher B. Shank believes it's more complicated than that.

"Just because you vote against a budget does not mean you vote against all of those things in a budget," he said.

The two Washington County rivals, whose primary election showdown this fall is intensifying about 100 miles away from their district in Annapolis, traded barbs on Facebook recently over their respective budget voting records.

Munson (R-Dist. 2) of Hagerstown launched the first attack during this month's winter storms, alleging Shank's vote against the budget last year was a vote against snow-removal funding.

In a lengthy response on his own Facebook page, Shank (R-Dist. 2B) of Hagerstown said he was disappointed that Munson "would actually stoop to such disingenuous stunts."

The online spat is likely a preview of a major campaign flashpoint, with Shank calling Munson's actions fiscally irresponsible and Munson playing up the benefits his district has received due to his cooperation on the budget.

"It doesn't make any sense for me to put so much work into a document and come out and vote against it," Munson said. "Fact is, when that budget passes, it's not a bloated budget. It's pretty much bare bones where we can make it."

Members of the budget committees who spend most of the session poring over thousands of line items take particular ownership in the final product.

"I see how hard all of us work for two-and-a-half months before the vote," said Del. Nancy R. Stocksdale, who serves on the House Appropriations Committee.

Still, she has no qualms in voting "nay" if it's fiscally imprudent. Stocksdale (R-Dist. 5A) of Westminster has consistently voted against the budget when Republican amendments are rejected out of hand.

"To some within the party, a budget ‘no' vote is a badge of honor," said a former Republican lawmaker who requested anonymity so as not to rile those still in office.

But the GOP budget committee members believe that a "no" vote amounts to "thumbing your nose at the process," the former legislator said.

Sometimes, a particular program's inclusion or omission will compel lawmakers to vote one way or the other. The preservation of $4.5 million for a coal tax credit that had been targeted for elimination pushed Del. Wendell R. Beitzel to support the current fiscal year's spending plan.

Only three other House Republicans voted "yes" on the budget last year. Beitzel and Del. D. Page Elmore (R-Dist. 38A) of Salisbury are the only House GOP members who have supported each budget under Gov. Martin O'Malley (D).

"Last year, had they not made any concessions at all on my interests, that would have been a reason not to vote for the budget," said Beitzel (R-Dist. 1A) of Accident.

Budget committee leaders said they strive for such collaboration.

"It boils down to the fundamentals of democracy," said Del. John L. Bohanan Jr. (D-Dist. 29B) of California. "You've got to compromise."

Even Democrats who consistently support the budget admit it's not perfect.

"If all 141 delegates voted against the budget because they didn't like a piece of it, you wouldn't have any votes for it," Bohanan said.

Because lawmakers vote on the entire budget package and not individual line items, Republican opponents should be held responsible for voting against all programs that receive state aid, not just those that they deem wasteful, some Democrats said.

"It's an all-or-nothing kind of thing," said Sen. Edward J. Kasemeyer (D-Dist. 12) of Columbia, who is vice chair of the Senate Budget & Taxation Committee.

That's why it infuriates Del. C. Sue Hecht when budget opponents show up for a ribbon-cutting event on a state-supported project. It happened this fall, she said, when Sen. Alexander X. Mooney attended a ceremony for a major highway project in Frederick.

"He takes the easy course [by voting against the budget], then beats his chest about all the good things he's done — and he's lying to his constituents," said Hecht (D-Dist. 3A) of Frederick.

House Minority Leader Anthony J. O'Donnell (R-Dist. 29C) of Lusby says he feels comfortable defending his votes against what he considers wasteful government spending that will lead to tax increases back home.

"If everyone just says, ‘Yes sir, yes sir, three bags full,' and go along to get their crumb of the pie, that's when you end up with a budget problem," he said.

Del. Susan C. Aumann (R-Dist. 42) of Timonium supported the budget last year, but expressed uneasiness with how O'Malley relies too heavily on spending transfers and federal stimulus in his fiscal 2011 plan.

"I equate it to putting a piece of newspaper over an open manhole," she said.