ANNAPOLIS — An effort by state lawmakers to exclude Washington County from a law allowing speed cameras to ticket drivers has failed, but they are expected to try again today.

Washington County’s delegation announced Wednesday they hoped to exclude the county from the bill. Del. Andrew A. Serafini, R-Washington, offered an amendment to the bill in committee that would have excluded Washington County, but that amendment failed.

A similar amendment to the bill, drafted by Del. LeRoy E. Myers Jr., R-Allegany/Washington, likely will be offered on the House floor today. It would exclude Washington, Allegany and Garrett counties from the bill.

Under the speed cameras bill, cameras would be allowed within a half-mile of a work or a school zone. Motorists would have to be driving at least 12 mph over the speed limit in order to be ticketed. The car’s owner would receive a fine, but no points on his or her license.

Montgomery County, Md., currently has a pilot program in place with speed camera enforcement.

Lawmakers in the House debated the issue Thursday, offering amendments that would lessen penalties, extend warning periods and even require the names of delegates who voted for the speed cameras to have their names on the back of the tickets issued to drivers. All of those efforts failed.

Del. Christopher B. Shank, R-Washington, offered an amendment Thursday that would have required weekly calibrations of the camera and require the technician who last calibrated the speed camera to appear in court if the driver chose to fight the fine. Shank said that would offer something missing from the bill: The opportunity for the driver to face his or her accuser.

His amendment, which failed 37-95, also would have allowed drivers to receive payment from the court if the calibration checks were not performed on the machine that ticketed them.

“We’re about to make a very large departure in how our system of jurisprudence works where you do not have a chance to confront your accuser,” Shank said.

He said his amendment would “balance the due process rights of our constituents.”