Kate Rice
Associate Editor
Loyola University Chicago School of Law, JD 2026
On October 7, 2024, Elon Musk’s pro-Trump Super PAC, America PAC, announced it would disburse $47 payments to residents of certain swing states who refer other swing state voters to sign a petition pledging support for the First and Second Amendments. Musk said on his social media platform, X, “ For every person you refer who is a swing state voter, you get $47! Easy money.” Eligibility is limited to registered voters in seven key battleground states: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Musk’s goal is to reach 1 million signatures, which would amount to $47 million in payments to signatories.
Musk’s political strategy
Musk’s petition is an example of a commonly used campaign tool to identify particularly energized voters who can be more closely targeted for get-out-the-vote operations come Election Day. By collecting signatories’ personal data like name, email, phone number, mailing address, and the referrer’s information, America PAC can build a database to more effectively strategize voter engagement efforts.
In addition, Musk has spoken on the power of referrals in politics, likening successful campaigning to how he has garnered a cult following of his electric car company, Tesla: by prioritizing word-of-mouth support over traditional advertisements. At a meeting of prominent billionaire conservative financiers, Musk said, “The most important thing [we] could do was ask two people to support Mr. Trump, and urge them to ask two more. Two people by two people — that’s how he would win.” By incentivizing petition referrals and facilitating seemingly organic grassroots movements, Musk hopes to sway the political discourse in pivotal voting districts in favor of Trump.
Pushing the legal limits
52 USC §10307 prohibits paying or accepting payment for voting or registering to vote. Brendan Fischer, a campaign finance lawyer and director of political watchdog Documented said on Musk’s petition initiative, “Is it legal? Probably . . . The fact that they are only paying the referrer rather than the signatory further insulates the PAC from any accusations that they are buying votes. Ultimately, what America PAC is doing here is spending money for voter data, which PACs and campaigns do all the time.” UCLA School of Law professor Richard Hasen also remarked that given the initiative does not directly pay participants to vote or register to vote, he considers Musk’s PAC’s program compliant with campaign finance law.
State laws vary on the legality of payment for gathering signatures for ballot initiatives and veto referendums at the rate of signatures collected. This practice, known as pay-per-signature compensation, has been outlawed in nine states: Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Montana, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. However, it remains legal to pay petition circulators by the hour. Further, America PAC is based in Texas, which does not have any pay-per-signature compensation laws on the books.
There are specific concerns in Wisconsin that the petition referrals would violate its election bribery law. Former Milwaukee election chief Claire Woodall said on the matter, “I just don’t think, on the surface, that it’s likely legal and going to hold up in Wisconsin. When you look at the statute, it’s very clear: you can’t pay someone on the basis of them voting or encouraging them to vote. In order to really sign the petition and receive payment, they are making voter registration requirement of that payment.” Much of the general public also seems skeptical of Musk’s efforts. Concerns about Musk’s ability to “buy” votes flooded the comments on his post on X, in addition to larger policy concerns, like the potential promotion of petition signature fraud.
Relaxed collaboration guidelines
The Federal Election Commission (FEC), the regulatory body responsible for policing campaign finance and federal elections, has long been criticized for its leniency regarding PAC activity. While only individuals can donate to traditional PACs capped at $5,000 annually, Super PACs can accept unlimited contributions from individuals, corporations, and unions. But while traditional PACs can contribute up to $10,000 to candidates, committees, coordinated communications, and independent expenditures, Super PACs may only use their funds for outside spending, like television advertisements or other promotional material, and cannot contribute directly to candidates or parties. The FEC enforces compliance with these caps, but previous efforts to curb excessive spending by wealthy special interests were struck down in the landmark case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which effectively created Super PACs and greatly widened the scope of political activities PACs may engage in.
Earlier this year, the FEC built on this momentum, issuing an advisory opinion allowing federal political campaigns to work directly with outside organizations, including state PACs, nonprofits, and Super PACs, on paid canvassing programs. The Trump campaign has since taken advantage of the relaxed coordination rules. In April, Trump’s political director James Blair invited numerous conservative external organizations to an “entirely off-the-record, private,” and “invite-only” meeting for a “meeting of the political minds,” aimed at discussing “collaborat[ion]” and “priorities and plans” for the general election. Blair later referred to the FEC advisory opinion as a “game-changer.” This has resulted in calls to Congress and the FEC to advance legislation that would better define ‘coordination’ and prohibit dubious PAC-coordination practices, like redboxing.
The ability to outsource costly canvassing operations to big-money groups that can accept unlimited donations is crucial as the Harris campaign shoots ahead in fundraising; as of August 31, the date of the most recent FEC filings, Harris has raised $678.2 million, while Trump raised $309.2 million. Conversely, the top 10 pro-Trump Super PACs have raised $329.4 million, as opposed to the $256.6 million raised by the top 10 Super PACs backing Harris. As the Trump campaign battles declining small-dollar contributions, it will remain to be seen if the reliance on wealthy megadonors and Super PACs will pay off this cycle, especially given Trump’s heavy populist messaging. So far, America PAC has contributed over $87 million to the Trump campaign and has indicated plans to spend more than $160 million on field operations.
Opening the door to unfettered influence
The PAC model functions to galvanize voters and concentrate funds to most effectively support candidates and parties. However, if left unchecked, the system runs the risk of leveraging dark money to undermine the democratic process and will of the voters. With seemingly unlimited funds and looser collaboration rules constraining Super PACs, Musk has the potential to profoundly influence the selection of the next president. Benjamin Soskis, a historian with the Urban Institute, noted “I’m not sure there is a precedent in modern history to how Musk has inserted himself into the presidential race.” As the nation enters unchartered territory this election season, voters must stay on the lookout for undue influence by wealthy donors and entities, safeguard their personal data when possible, and preserve their own voice amidst the onslaught of political advertisements, social media campaigns, and initiatives similar to Musk’s.