<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Brewer Leads Hearing on Voting Snafus</title>
	<atom:link href="http://nypress.com/brewer-leads-hearing-on-voting-snafus/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://nypress.com/brewer-leads-hearing-on-voting-snafus/</link>
	<description>New York&#039;s essential guide to culture, arts, politics, news and more</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Mar 2013 11:49:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tompoe</title>
		<link>http://nypress.com/brewer-leads-hearing-on-voting-snafus/#comment-953</link>
		<dc:creator>Tompoe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2010 12:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://westsidespirit.com/?p=7388#comment-953</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Are the voting machines proprietary?  Inherently, any and all proprietary voting systems eliminate the right to vote, which requires public scrutiny of the elections.  That&#039;s why Australia rejected proprietary voting systems, and requires Open Source voting systems, owned by no single entity.  Australia felt the voters should be able to protect their right to vote, and not be forced to vote on systems that eliminate public scrutiny and utilizes a secret vote count.  Did these questions get answered?  Did the city council inform the public on the findings of Australia from back in 2000?  Will the report coming out in December address the voters&#039; right to public scrutiny of the elections?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are the voting machines proprietary?  Inherently, any and all proprietary voting systems eliminate the right to vote, which requires public scrutiny of the elections.  That&#8217;s why Australia rejected proprietary voting systems, and requires Open Source voting systems, owned by no single entity.  Australia felt the voters should be able to protect their right to vote, and not be forced to vote on systems that eliminate public scrutiny and utilizes a secret vote count.  Did these questions get answered?  Did the city council inform the public on the findings of Australia from back in 2000?  Will the report coming out in December address the voters&#8217; right to public scrutiny of the elections?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
