<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE rss [<!ENTITY % HTMLlat1 PUBLIC "-//W3C//ENTITIES Latin 1 for XHTML//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml-lat1.ent">]>
<rss version="0.92" xml:base="http://www.publicampaign.org">
<channel>
 <title>Public Campaign - voter-owned elections - Comments</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog-tags/voter-owned-elections-0</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;voter-owned elections&quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>I see...</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2007/07/18/portland-is-voter-owned#comment-23523</link>
 <description>I see... I have never been to Portland.</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2008 21:47:21 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Clean Elections</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2007/07/31/north-carolina-papers-on-board#comment-18567</link>
 <description>Thank you for notifying me of North Carolina&#039;s publically funded elections board, and setting an example for the rest of the country to follow.</description>
 <pubDate>Sat, 04 Aug 2007 01:05:51 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>clean elections in NC</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2007/07/31/north-carolina-papers-on-board#comment-18560</link>
 <description>Publicly funded elections mean NOTHING if the candidates have the option to opt in or out.

They are only meaningful if all candidates, at every level of publicly-elected government are required to use only public funds.</description>
 <pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2007 19:18:29 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
