<?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.campaignmoney.org">
<channel>
 <title>Public Campaign Action Fund - Pays For Itself - Comments</title>
 <link>http://www.campaignmoney.org/blog/2007/04/23/pays-for-itself</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;Pays For Itself&quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Save money, Save democracy</title>
 <link>http://www.campaignmoney.org/blog/2007/04/23/pays-for-itself#comment-78973</link>
 <description>Great information! Maybe the discussion we should &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt; have is about how much it&#039;s costing us &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; to have public funding. 

The kind of money that&#039;s needed to win elections today isn&#039;t given without some accountability on the part of the recipient or expectations on the part of the donor. 

If we want greater accountability from our elected officials, we have to return political influence to voters. </description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2007 14:50:19 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Pays For Itself</title>
 <link>http://www.campaignmoney.org/blog/2007/04/23/pays-for-itself</link>
 <description>Though it doesn&amp;#39;t mention the Fair Elections Act by name, this &lt;em&gt;Orlando Sentinel&lt;/em&gt; editorial is &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/orl-ed23107apr23,0,7158256.story?coll=orl-opinion-headlines&quot;&gt;strongly in favor &lt;/a&gt;of a public financing system for congressional elections in the model of Arizona and Maine&amp;#39;s Clean Elections programs, arguing that those states offer a much better example than Florida when it comes to reducing the influence of special interest money.</description>
 <pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2007 18:18:59 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
