Musk is trying to leverage his extreme wealth to get Trump elected. But his efforts could fall flat.
When Kamala Harris says she’s the underdog in this presidential race, she means it.
For one thing, Donald Trump has an entire “news” network behind him, as he himself confessed last week when he visited the Fox and Friends couch.
When the hosts complimented his performance at the recent Al Smith dinner, Trump admitted that “a couple of people from Fox” helped him write jokes for the event. And he then proceeded to divulge that his next “meeting” was with Fox mogul Rupert Murdoch and spilled that he was going to tell him “don’t put on negative commercials for 21 days, don’t put them on, and don’t put on their horrible people that come and lie. I’m going to say, ‘Rupert, please do it this way and then we’re going to have a victory, cause everyone wants that.’”
Of course, it’s not exactly news that Fox is a de facto arm of the Trump campaign. But the additional ace Trump has up his sleeve this year is his very own oligarch, Elon Musk, considered the richest man in the world.
Back in July, Musk endorsed Trump and committed millions to electing him via the Musk-run America PAC. Since then, Musk reportedly donated $75 million to the PAC in a 3 month period, $30 million of which went to America PAC’s ground game to knock on doors for Trump. That operation has been riddled with incompetence and claims of fraud.
The accusations that Musk dropped the ball on the campaign’s ground game may explain Musk’s recent shift to personally going all in for Trump in Pennsylvania, where he went to undergrad at UPenn. Not only has Musk followed up his appearance at Trump’s Butler, PA rally with a series of bizarre one-man town halls in the swing state, but he appears to have hatched a legally questionable scheme—which Election Law Blog calls “clearly illegal vote buying”—to incentivize swing state voters to support Trump, under the guise of “signing a petition” in support of the first and second amendments.
In today’s piece, I’ll explore how Musk is pushing the boundaries of not just political norms but also U.S. law with his sketchy scheme while creating major conflicts of interest in the process. Is there anything the government or law enforcement can do to shut it down in the final two weeks of the campaign? Or is this too late, given the damage he has already done to Harris in this must-win state?
In these final 2 weeks, I know we’re all feeling anxious, but don’t forget every Sunday we release our Wins of the Week to highlight the week’s winning political developments. So if you need a weekly election pick-me-up, upgrade your subscription to paid to get this dose of positivity!
Musk’s Corrupt Scheme
At a Pennsylvania town hall on Saturday, Elon Musk unveiled a $1 million check to one rally attendee named John who had signed Musk’s America PAC petition.
The petition reads:
The First and Second Amendments guarantee freedom of speech and the right to bear arms. By signing below, I am pledging my support for the First and Second Amendments.
And it goes on to promise:
EARN $1,000,000!
Oct 19: John earned $1,000,000 in Harrisburg!
Oct 20: Kristine earned $1,000,000 in Pittsburgh!
Oct 21: One petition signer will earn $1,000,000 in Pennsylvania.
Oct 22 – Nov 5: Each day, one petition signer from either PA, GA, NV, AZ, MI, WI, or NC will earn $1,000,000.
According to Vox, Musk’s scheme is “a plan to give away $1 million each day until November 5 to a randomly chosen person who’s signed a petition from his political action committee.”
And how is this legal exactly?
Vox certainly doesn’t think it is:
To win the money, the signee must be a registered swing state voter — and that criterion has raised concerns that Musk may be in violation of a federal law that makes it illegal to pay people (or offer them an incentive) to either register to vote or cast a ballot.
Many have raised the alarm about the legality of such a scheme, with politics ethicist Norm Ornstein calling on the Justice Department to get involved.
And with billionaire Mark Cuban bringing it to the attention of Governor Josh Shapiro on Musk’s own platform:
Shapiro weighed in on Meet The Press on Sunday, saying it was “deeply concerning” and is something that “law enforcement should take a look at.”
And in fact, according to UCLA’s Rick Hasen at Election Law Blog, it is “clearly illegal’:
See 52 U.S.C. 10307(c): “Whoever knowingly or willfully gives false information as to his name, address or period of residence in the voting district for the purpose of establishing his eligibility to register or vote, or conspires with another individual for the purpose of encouraging his false registration to vote or illegal voting, or 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…” (Emphasis added.)
And:
See also the DOJ Election Crimes Manual at 44: “The bribe may be anything having monetary value, including cash, liquor, lottery chances, and welfare benefits such as food stamps. Garcia, 719 F.2d at 102…
For an offer or a payment to violate Section 10307(c), it must have been intended to induce or reward the voter for engaging in one or more acts necessary to cast a ballot.… Moreover, payments made for some purpose other than to induce or reward voting activity, such as remuneration for campaign work, do not violate this statute. See United States v. Canales 744 F.2d 413, 423 (5th Cir. 1984) (upholding conviction because jury justified in inferring that payments were for voting, not campaign work). Similarly, Section 10307(c) does not apply to payments made to signature-gatherers for voter registrations such individuals may obtain. However, such payments become actionable under Section 10307(c) if they are shared with the person being registered.” (Emphases added.)
Which raises the question, why would Musk risk legal jeopardy for Trump?
Musk’s Conflicts Of Interest
Musk has a direct interest in Trump’s reelection, and not just because he is ideologically aligned with him. Trump has famously pledged to name Musk to head up a new “government efficiency commission,” whatever that means.
But for Musk, that doesn’t just mean a government post, it means power over his own extensive business interests within the U.S. government.
As ABC News’ Selina Wang made clear:
“That role can actually give him the power to regulate the very agencies that hold sway over his companies.”
Per The New York Times:
Mr. Musk’s rocket company, SpaceX, effectively dictates NASA’s rocket launch schedule. The Defense Department relies on him to get most of its satellites to orbit. His companies were promised $3 billion across nearly 100 different contracts last year with 17 federal agencies.
His entanglements with federal regulators are also numerous and adversarial. His companies have been targeted in at least 20 recent investigations or reviews, including over the safety of his Tesla cars and the environmental damage caused by his rockets.
No wonder Musk is holding nothing back for Trump. But it’s not just the upside if Trump wins. There’s also, in Musk’s own mind at least, a very steep downside if he doesn’t.
Earlier this month, Elon Musk made a damning admission about what would happen should Trump lose:
“If he loses, I’m f—ed,” Musk told Tucker Carlson of the Republican nominee in an interview broadcast on X.
“How long do you think my prison sentence is going to be?” the world’s richest man quipped. “Will I see my children? I don’t know.”
And we thought Trump was running to keep out of jail. Looks like Musk is right there with him.
Can Musk Be Held Accountable?
When White House Press Secretary Karine Jean Pierre was asked about the legality of Musk’s swing state voter lottery scheme, she declined to weigh in, deferring to the Federal Election Commission (FEC.)
But can—and will—the FEC do anything about it? Likely not.
The FEC is meant to be an independent agency to enforce campaign finance laws, but it is widely considered toothless, with its 6 bipartisan commissioners often deadlocking 3-3 on questions that come before them. Last year, for example, it was asked to create guidelines for the use of AI in political ads but deadlocked 3-3, with
Republican commissioner Allen Dickerson even arguing that the agency did not have the authority to regulate such advertisements.
Musk is already no stranger to FEC complaints. In July, Priorities USA Action filed a complaint against Musk’s America PAC for using Trump campaign assets in its own ads in contravention of campaign finance law. And then in August, End Citizens United filed a complaint with the agency against Musk for his X Spaces interview with Trump, calling it essentially an illegal in-kind contribution to his campaign.
There appears to have been no action on either complaint. This is perhaps unsurprising, as the agency is chaired by a Trump appointee. But it is certainly indicative of why Musk feels little threat of accountability from the U.S. government.
But just as tech savvy pranksters are sabotaging Musk’s America PAC get out the vote tool in Arizona and Nevada, can this scheme backfire on Musk and Trump as well?
One billionaire, SunMicrosystems co-founder Vinod Khosla, thinks so, urging Democrats to sign it, go for the $1 million, then vote Harris:
Since part of Musk’s goal here is to capture swing state voter email addresses to be able to target them later with pro-Trump messaging, Fortune Magazine breaks down the added benefit of Harris voters signing the petition:
Not only would they stand an equal chance to receive the cash prize as their Republican peers, but it would gum up Musk’s operation to boot. Muddying his database with an unknown number of Democrats could drain resources that could have otherwise gone to mobilizing voters for Donald Trump by wasting it on the opposing side.
One of the traits Musk shares with Trump is unwavering shamelessness, so it is likely the much-maligned scheme will continue through election day despite any efforts to shut it down. But will it accomplish anything?
So far, Musk hasn’t been able to move the needle in Pennsylvania. According to The Washington Post’s swing state polling average, there’s “no shift” over the past week toward Trump in Pennsylvania.
Much as we would all love to see Musk hit with legal consequences for his outrageous scheme, with just two weeks to go in the campaign it’s unlikely that the Justice Department, FEC, or state law enforcement will intervene in any timely way.
But zooming out, Musk’s actions are self-defeating and reek of desperation. His huge investments into the ground game operations are floundering, and as a consequence he has been forced to come out in person to make things right with Trump.
His singularly weird and off-putting attempts to win over Keystone state voters aren’t swaying public opinion, despite his frenetic and awkward leaping about. Nor have his crude attacks upon immigrants landed—perhaps because he himself is one. So of course he resorted to the only thing he has left, and is now attempting to buy votes outright. But the electorate is on to him. Musk may be the richest man in the world, and he may control one of the biggest platforms out there. But he still doesn’t know a thing about Pennsylvania voters.
