A pro-Kamala Harris political group, the Progressive Turnout Project, has recently mailed a controversial flyer to Pennsylvania residents, offering a “free contest” with $50,000 in prizes to boost voter participation. One such mailer shared with YWN by a local voter encourages recipients to scratch off a section of the mailer to reveal their “voter grade” and compare it to their neighbors. Shockingly, the mailer dangles the promise of financial incentives in what appears to be a clear attempt to influence voting behavior.

The Progressive Turnout Project, which openly supports the Biden-Harris administration, has backed its actions with the pretext of a “contest,” but the implications are hard to ignore. The mailer doesn’t just incentivize voting; it also publicly shames recipients by comparing their voting history to that of their neighbors. Residents who scratch off the flyer see whether they receive an “A,” “F,” or something in between—essentially grading them on their civic duty. The envelope suggests they could win a cut of $50,000, depending on their participation.

Such tactics raise significant ethical and legal concerns. Federal law prohibits the offering of monetary incentives in exchange for political participation, as this is considered a form of undue influence on the electorate. While it’s one thing to encourage civic participation, dangling cash prizes in a way that could influence how, or even if, someone votes crosses a troubling line. Offering money as part of a “contest” tied to election participation seems dangerously close to violating campaign finance laws designed to protect the integrity of the voting process.

Even more troubling is the silence from Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner. Krasner has made headlines recently by speaking out against Elon Musk’s American Liberty PAC, which has been running a $1 million-a-day voter giveaway program across multiple states, including Pennsylvania. Musk’s initiative, aimed at rallying voters to support constitutional rights, drew immediate ire from Krasner, who argued that it constitutes an illegal lottery and could unduly sway voters. Krasner’s office went so far as to file a lawsuit challenging Musk’s giveaway, positioning him as a vocal enforcer of election law when it came to Musk’s actions.

But when it comes to the Progressive Turnout Project’s “contest” mailers, which clearly involve a financial incentive closely tied to election participation, Krasner’s office has been noticeably silent. There has been no legal action, no public statement, not even a hint of inquiry into whether these mailers cross legal or ethical lines. The disparity is startling. Why would the DA target Musk so aggressively, while allowing the Progressive Turnout Project’s actions to go unchecked?

This selective enforcement undermines public trust in the integrity of our elections. Financially incentivizing voters, especially under the guise of a “contest” that rates them on their civic duty, raises serious questions about fairness in the political process. In a country where equal access to voting is a cornerstone of democracy, tactics like these have the potential to unduly sway the electorate and influence outcomes in key races.

With Election Day around the corner, it’s essential that election laws be applied evenly, regardless of political affiliation. Voters deserve clarity, and above all, they deserve to know that our election officials won’t play favorites when it comes to enforcing the law. The Philadelphia DA’s silence on this mailer is deafening, and it risks sending a dangerous message: that certain groups can get away with bending the rules, so long as their agenda aligns with the right officials.

(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)