A controversial $1 million giveaway, backed by Elon Musk’s America PAC to boost voter turnout for former President Donald Trump, has faced scrutiny after it was revealed that the first winners were already registered Republicans who had voted prior to receiving the prize. According to a recent report, the initiative, designed to incentivize voter participation, has sparked criticism for its execution and transparency.
The giveaway, launched by the tech billionaire’s super PAC, offers a chance for randomly selected registered voters to win $1 million daily in the lead-up to the November 5 election. The initiative targets voters in key battleground states—Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, and North Carolina—and runs from October 17 through Election Day.
To qualify, voters must sign a petition supporting the First and Second Amendments. The first two winners, Pennsylvania voters John Dreher and Kristine Fishell, were identified by the PAC as registered Republicans who had already cast their ballots before winning the sweepstakes, as reported by Politico. This revelation raised questions about the efficacy and intent of the program, particularly regarding its influence on voter turnout.
In addition to this, the initiative has faced internal and external challenges. A political vendor handling contract canvassing for the super PAC advised its employees not to speak to the media following reports that parts of the canvassing operation may have been exaggerated. In a text message obtained by The Guardian’s Hugo Lowell, the vendor told its workers, “A handful of disgruntled former contractors who were either fired or demoted are conspiring with reporters who want to elect Kamala Harris and undermine our program.
Please ask your canvassers to keep an eye out and let their managers know if they receive any calls we should know about.” The campaign’s difficulties don’t stop there. The Washington Post highlighted that Musk’s “erratic leadership style,” which includes making sudden demands and firing staff without warning, has negatively impacted the PAC’s operations and may limit its overall effectiveness.
As the giveaway continues, questions about the transparency of the process and the management behind it remain central to public discourse. While the initiative aims to encourage voter participation, the early revelations and internal turmoil cast doubt on its ability to achieve its intended goals.