Musk's $1 Million Offer Stirs Legal and Ethical Controversy Amid the 2024 Election

Elon Musk, billionaire entrepreneur and avid supporter of former President Donald Trump, recently revealed a plan to give away $1 million every day until the election to a randomly chosen individual [1]. The requirements? Eligible participants must be registered voters in Pennsylvania — a pivotal battleground swing state — and have signed a conservative petition organized by Musk’s political action committee, which advocates for First Amendment protections on freedom of speech and the Second Amendment’s right to “keep and bear arms” [2]. Previously, Musk had offered $47 to all registered voters in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, and Wisconsin, and $100 to registered voters in Pennsylvania as an incentive to sign his petition, aiming to bolster Republican support in key swing states [3]. Now, he has dramatically raised the stakes with a $1 million prize.

Critics of Musk’s payouts are raising concerns over the legality of such payments, questioning whether they transgress ethical and legal boundaries. As UCLA Law professor Rick Hasen, expert in election law, argues in his blog, “Though maybe some of the other things Musk was doing were of murky legality, this one is clearly illegal. See 52 U.S.C. 10307 (c): “Whoever knowingly or willfully … pays or offers to pay or accepts payment either for registration to vote or for voting shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both”” [4]. While certain benefits to incentivize and help people vote are both legally permissible and common – for instance, services like public transit and rideshare companies often provide free or discounted rides to polling locations on Election Day – Hasen’s argument underscores how Musk’s direct monetary inducements appear to violate federal election law by veering into illegal vote buying. Through financially incentivizing participation only for those who sign a conservative petition, Musk’s payouts undermine the federal statute’s core intent: ensuring that voting remains a free, voluntary choice untainted by external financial manipulation. There is a distinct difference between encouraging voter participation and exerting overt influence through fiscal enticements.

In light of the legal gray area of Musk’s $1 million payouts, Josh Shapiro, the Democratic governor of Pennsylvania and the state’s former attorney general, said that Musk’s plan was “deeply concerning” and “it’s something that law enforcement could take a look at” [5]. Nearly a week later, Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner filed a lawsuit against Musk and his PAC over the contest, contending that the lottery violates Philadelphia’s consumer protection laws and requesting an injunction to pause the contest during the legal proceedings [6]. Two days after the lawsuit was filed, Musk attempted to move the decision to federal court, claiming that the case raises issues of free-speech and election interference that should be handled at the federal level. Ultimately, Musk’s challenge prompted the state judge who had been overseeing the case to temporarily halt proceedings [7]. According to media reports, the U.S. Department of Justice has warned Musk’s PAC that the contest might violate federal election law, though federal prosecutors have yet to take any formal public action. Despite ongoing legal efforts to block the giveaway, Musk’s America PAC has already awarded $1 million prizes to 14 people as of Friday, November 1, and announced that the final prize will be given on Election Day [8].

While substantial funds are routinely spent in election campaigns to boost voter turnout, Musk’s direct cash giveaways mark a unique and controversial approach to influencing voter behavior. Unlike traditional campaign donations or get-out-the-vote initiatives, Musk’s $1 million daily prize introduces an unprecedented financial lure directly tied to voter participation, raising essential legal scrutiny. Such large scale financial inducements risk clouding individuals’ authentic political beliefs and may unfairly sway them toward a particular stance, blurring the line between genuine civic engagement and coerced allegiance.

The reservations surrounding the undue influence of Musk’s payouts appear not to have been misguided; Trump’s decisive victory in the U.S. Presidential Election, securing nearly every key battleground state, including a nearly 51% victory in Pennsylvania, raises questions about the role financial power may have played in securing his win [9]. Although the extent to which Musk’s fiscal pressures actually increased conservative voter turnout is uncertain, it is clear that voting incentives in this election were shaped by more than just traditional issues like the economy and immigration. And it paid off – not only is Trump the President-elect, but Musk has also been promised a role as head of a new Department of Government Efficiency, with his influence now encroaching from the campaign trail into the White House itself [10].

Given the implications that a precedent of unrestricted financial influence could hold for our democratic processes, Musk’s cash giveaways expose the urgent need to clearly define the boundary between legitimate incentives aimed at boosting voter turnout and outright breaches of federal election law. We are at the precipice of an unprecedented era in politics – wealthy individuals wield more power than ever in shaping electoral outcomes, and violations of election laws have become increasingly normalized. It is imperative that we reinforce and strictly adhere to the clear standards set by election laws in order to preserve the sanctity of voter intent and protect Americans’ fundamental right to vote. In a time where financial influence has permeated the electoral landscape, unwavering commitment to legal electoral standards is essential to ensure that elections reflect genuine public will rather than the interests of a powerful few.

Bibliography

[1] Schleifer, Theodore. "Musk's $1 Million Offer Raises New Legal Questions." The New York Times. Last modified October 20, 2024. Accessed November 2, 2024. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/20/us/politics/elon-musk-million-dollar-petition.html?searchResultPosition=32.

[2] Moneywatch. "Elon Musk is offering $1 million a day to sign his PAC petition. Is that legal?" CBS News. Last modified October 23, 2024. Accessed November 2, 2024. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/musk-petition-pac-1-million-trump-legal-questions/.

[3] Tenbarge, Kat. "Elon Musk's PAC offers $47 payouts to refer swing state voters to sign petition." NBC News. Last modified October 7, 2024. Accessed November 2, 2024. https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/musk-pac-signature-47-pay-refer-swing-state-voters-sign-petition-rcna174310.

[4] Hansen, Rick. "Elon Musk Veers Into Clearly Illegal Vote Buying, Offering $1 Million Per Day Lottery Prize Only to Registered Voters." Election Law Blog. Last modified October 19, 2024. Accessed November 2, 2024. https://electionlawblog.org/?p=146397.

[5] Marquez, Alexandra. "Pennsylvania Gov. Shapiro: Law enforcement should 'take a look at' Elon Musk voter payments." NBC News. Last modified October 20, 2024. Accessed November 2, 2024. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/pennsylvania-gov-shapiro-law-enforcement-take-look-elon-musk-voter-pay-rcna176279.

[6] Ioanes, Ellen. "Elon Musk says he's giving away $1 million a day to voters. Is that legal?" Vox. Last modified October 28, 2024. Accessed November 2, 2024. https://www.vox.com/politics/378912/musk-trump-voting-contest-million-dollars-swing-state-lottery-pennsylvania.

[7] Cohen, Luc. "Elon Musk loses bid to move case over $1 million voter prizes." Reuters. Last modified November 1, 2024. Accessed November 2, 2024. https://www.reuters.com/legal/elon-musk-loses-bid-move-case-over-1-million-voter-prizes-2024-11-01/.

[8] Ibid.

[9] The Associated Press. "Live election updates: Harris concedes to Trump." The Associated Press. Last modified November 6, 2024. Accessed November 6, 2024. https://apnews.com/live/trump-harris-election-updates-11-5-2024.

[10] Saul, Derek. "Here's What Elon Musk May Do In A Trump Administration." Forbes. Last modified November 6, 2024. Accessed November 7, 2024. https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereksaul/2024/11/06/heres-what-elon-musk-may-do-in-a-trump-administration/.