Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro has raised concerns over billionaire Elon Musk’s initiative to give away $1 million daily to randomly selected registered voters in the battleground state, calling for potential legal review. The tech mogul’s Super PAC has been offering the payments as part of a petition drive supporting free speech and gun rights.
During an appearance on Meet the Press, Shapiro stated that while Musk is entitled to his political views and support for former President Donald Trump, the large sums of money flowing into politics through this giveaway raise “serious questions.” He emphasized that law enforcement should consider examining the legality of such payments, especially given the financial incentives tied to voter registration.
Musk’s controversial plan, launched through his America PAC, promises $1 million daily to a registered voter who signs a petition and attends related rallies. Participants are also encouraged to refer others, with a reward of $47 for each registered voter who signs. Legal experts have warned that the scheme may violate federal election laws, which prohibit offering payments to influence voter registration or voting.
Election law expert Rick Hasen pointed to a specific provision in federal law—52 U.S.C. 10307(c)—that outlaws paying individuals for registering to vote or casting a vote. Hasen explained that Musk’s plan effectively creates a lottery where only registered voters can participate, making it a potential violation of the law.
Musk and his America PAC have yet to comment on the criticism. As of now, it remains unclear whether federal authorities will investigate the initiative, but experts agree that the payments could face legal challenges if enforcement action is pursued.
Background and Broader Implications
Musk’s foray into political campaigning via America PAC has raised eyebrows, not only for its financial giveaways but also for its significant support of Trump’s re-election campaign. The PAC, largely funded by Musk, has invested millions into voter mobilization efforts across key swing states.
While Musk is a vocal advocate of free speech and gun rights, critics argue that his actions blur the lines between political expression and financial influence, particularly when tied to voter registration efforts.
Legal Concerns
Election laws are designed to prevent undue financial influence on the electoral process. While offering compensation to signature gatherers is legal in some contexts, paying individuals for their participation in voter registration or voting could lead to charges of bribery or vote-buying.
Federal authorities may choose to issue a warning to Musk’s PAC, urging them to halt the payments, or pursue more formal legal action. The situation underscores ongoing concerns about the role of money in politics, particularly as it relates to voter participation and election integrity.
As the controversy unfolds, it is likely that legal and political experts will continue to weigh in on whether Musk’s initiative crosses legal boundaries. For now, the initiative remains under scrutiny, with the potential for federal action to follow.