Elon Musk’s political action committee has already fanned flames of national controversy. Specifically, they’re trying to get themselves to pay $1 million a day to voters in Wisconsin and six other battleground states. This initiative, aimed at those who sign a petition supporting the First and Second Amendments, has ignited a legal and political battle. Musk’s lawyers have countered that these payments constitute free speech. At the same time, critics argue that they might influence this spring’s hotly contested Wisconsin Supreme Court election.
Things reached a new level of ridiculous on this Sunday, when Musk took to personally handing out $1 million checks to two separate Wisconsin voters. He soon appointed them as spokespeople for his political caucus. He emphasized the election’s importance, linking it to Donald Trump’s agenda and calling it critical for “the future of civilization.”
“I think this will be important for the future of civilization,” – Elon Musk
Musk’s contributions to the Wisconsin supreme court election have already topped $20 million, behind mostly conservative candidate Brad Schimel. This unprecedented spending has raised concerns among liberals, including Susan Crawford and her allies, who view Musk’s involvement as an attempt to sway the court’s impartiality. Musk’s attorneys have requested that two liberal justices, Jill Karofsky and Rebecca Dallet, recuse themselves from the case due to their prior campaign activities for Crawford.
Musk’s strategy echoes similar tactics employed before last year’s presidential election, where his committee offered $1 million daily to voters in multiple battleground states. His legal team contends that banning these cash giveaways would infringe on the Wisconsin and U.S. constitutions. Then they try to legally protect their competitive giveaways by framing their giveaways as exercises in free speech.
“Wisconsin law prohibits offering anything of value to induce anyone to vote,” – Josh Kaul
Regardless of the merits of these legal arguments, the appearance of bias is still very much the problem. Even Elon Musk admitted that his support for Schimel created an appearance of impropriety. He does not waver in his hands-on approach, showing up to events himself instead of sending surrogates.
“I’m not phoning it in. I’m here in person.” – Elon Musk
As is true across the country, the stakes are high in the Wisconsin supreme court election. Total expenditures have already set national spending records for a judicial election, having surpassed $81 million. As Musk’s political action committee runs an increasingly controversial campaign, the debate over the harm done by money in politics has never been more urgent.