<?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 - The Speech in Question - Comments</title>
 <link>http://www.campaignmoney.org/blog/2008/01/02/the-speech-in-question</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;The Speech in Question&quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>The Speech in Question</title>
 <link>http://www.campaignmoney.org/blog/2008/01/02/the-speech-in-question</link>
 <description>North Carolina was the first state to pass a law offering an option for state judicial candidates to seek office using a full public financing system.  Participation in the program has been high and public response has been sufficient to advance campaigns to offer a full public financing option for other races in the state.  But a group is challenging North Carolina&amp;#39;s law with the dubious &amp;quot;free speech&amp;quot; argument which a group of judges says misses the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/columns/story/852448.html&quot;&gt;entire point of the program.&lt;/a&gt;</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:03:34 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
