Barry Moore

The Democratic challenger to U.S. Rep. Barry Moore in Alabama’s November Senate race is accusing the Republican of endorsing what he says could constitute bribery under federal and state election laws.

Birmingham attorney Everett Wess, in an email to AL.com on Tuesday, criticized comments Moore made last week about President Donald Trump’s proposal to provide a $5,000 “dividend” to all Americans if Republicans retain control of both the U.S. Senate and House.

Moore said the proposal could be “a good investment.”

“Moore’s remarks deserve scrutiny because they frame a proposed government payment as an electoral ‘investment,’” Wess said.

“Alabama voters should ask whether that is responsible public policy, or an attempt to turn taxpayer dollars into political leverage.”

Wess cited a federal law prohibiting expenditures made to influence voting.

The statute states that anyone who offers or spends money to induce someone “either to vote or withhold his vote or to vote for or against any candidate” can face fines or up to one year in prison.

He also pointed to an Alabama law that makes bribing or attempting to influence a voter a Class C misdemeanor, punishable by up to three months in jail.

“These laws draw a clear line: money or other benefits must not be offered in exchange for a vote,” Wess said.

“My pledge to the people of Alabama is simple: I will understand the law, follow it, and put Alabama voters ahead of loyalty to any administration,” Wess said.

“Our state deserves a U.S. senator who respects both the rule of law and the independence of the people they serve.”

Election law experts interviewed by The New York Times have said it would be difficult to mount a legal challenge arguing that the payments amount to bribery.

They noted that Trump’s proposed “dividend” would be available to all Americans regardless of how they vote, a key distinction in determining whether it constitutes bribery.

Trump promoted the idea during the Republican midterm convention in Dallas.

Experts have also noted that any such payments would require congressional approval and could not be implemented through executive order.

Vice President JD Vance has suggested tariff revenue could help fund the checks. But the roughly $330 billion collected through tariffs since the start of Trump’s second term would fall well short of the estimated $1 trillion cost of the proposal.