The process must be respected in review of gubernatorial election

Constitutional attorney, author, and radio and television host Mark Levin has a name for Republicans who seem to flee at the first sign of controversy or dispute with liberals and Democrats. He calls them "French Republicans."

Others, including former Louisiana governor and presidential candidate Bobby Jindal, refer to them as the "Surrender Caucus."

Now, it seems that this bunch is setting up a presence in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. It's one reason that those of us who consider ourselves strong, principled conservatives get so frustrated with so many elected Republicans. They're too willing to concede or give in to the Democrats instead of standing strong.

With an extremely close contest between Gov. Matt Bevin and Andy Beshear, the governor is rightly looking into his options. First on the table is a recanvass, which he has requested, and which will occur next week. That's a simple process that takes place on a county-by-county basis. Vote totals are checked and the results are added again to ensure that no calculation mistakes were made. The margin of around 5,100 votes makes it unlikely that things will significantly change, but in an election where two votes per precinct made the difference, it's possible that a recording or mathematical error could alter the total. It's as possible that Beshear would pick up votes as it is Bevin would.

From there, it gets tricky. Kentucky law does not allow gubernatorial candidates to request a formal recount, as it does for local offices. A recount is a more involved process that includes examining voting machines to make sure they were working properly and recording votes as they were cast. The candidate who requests the recount is required to pay for it, and it involves a court process.

If Bevin thinks there is reason to move past a recanvass, he is required to contest the election with the General Assembly. This happened last year, when a legislative candidate lost by one vote and went through the procedure. The legislature forms a committee of randomly-selected members, eight from the House of Representatives and three from the Senate. The committee then hears testimony, reviews evidence, can order a formal recount, and makes a recommendation for the full legislature's decision.

Bevin has alluded to some improprieties in the election, but as of this writing, has offered no specifics. There's been anecdotal evidence, though, of problems. One precinct in Lexington didn't open until 6:30 a.m. because no one from the school system came to open the building. Some have reported that some paper ballot users were given ballots pre-marked for Beshear and other Democrats (one of the best arguments against using paper ballots that can be made). Others have mentioned other issues. It's been stated that in some Louisville precincts, neither Bevin nor Libertarian candidate John Hicks received a single vote; all of the ballots went to Beshear. And there's an infamous screenshot of a tweet, which is probably a fake based on the way the location is spelled "Louiville" instead of "Louisville," in which someone claims to have shredded a box of Bevin ballots.

That last is most likely a not-so-clever Photoshop job, but is there enough anecdotal evidence for Bevin to proceed with contesting the election? He said in his news conference that his team is in the process of gathering information and taking affidavits of those who have information about improprieties.

This is as it should be. There's a process in place, and we should all want fair and free elections where everyone's vote is recorded as cast and there is no fraud. But you wouldn't know it judging from the remarks of a number of Republicans, who seem willing to let a Democrat take office even if he earned that office improperly.

Even some legislators are saying that Bevin should give up the fight. Suppose he does, and then incontrovertible evidence of misdeeds comes to light after Beshear takes office and starts making changes? Would they be OK with that? When Senate President Robert Stivers pointed out how the process works, the national liberal media quickly started the "Republicans are going to steal the election" mantra.

Back in 1995, Paul Patton defeated Larry Forgy by a statewide margin of more than 21,000 votes. In that election, like this one just concluded, Jefferson County made the difference. Forgy alleged voter fraud, saying that the election was stolen from him in Louisville, and actually ended up with some indictments to prove his claims. Four people, including two high-level Patton aides, were charged. The indictments were later dismissed by a special judge, but reinstated by appellate courts. Patton ended up pardoning them, removing any possibility of determining for certain if he had won the election fairly, to quote then-Attorney General Ben Chandler. (There's a very interesting local angle to that story that might bear telling at some point in the future).

Bevin's margin of loss to Beshear is much less than Forgy's margin was against Patton. Although Forgy did not contest the election, the later criminal cases did call into question the election's integrity.

Does Bevin not deserve the right to know that he lost fairly and squarely? Does this state not deserve to know as well? Wouldn't Beshear want to know that his victory was genuine? Probably not, because his post-election comments were basically, "We won, you lost, it's over."

It's true that Bevin had a prickly relationship even with members of his own party in the General Assembly, but these people should be worried more about the integrity of the election than they are making peace and moving on. So many are worried about what a contested election will do to the state, and what might happen if the legislature ends up deciding that Bevin is the actual winner. They say that with GOP supermajorities in both houses, and Republicans in the major watchdog offices of attorney general and auditor, they can hold Beshear and his agenda in check. They should be more worried about the possibility of an improperly-elected governor running the state.

So, let the process move forward. It's there for a reason. Maybe things need to be changed to provide for a recount for gubernatorial races, like exists for local races. But the current setup is what they have to work with now. If Bevin is satisfied with the results after the recanvass, then fine. He's an honorable man. But if he finds something that convinces him that he needs to contest the election, then he has that right. It's our law. And members of both parties need to respect that. The "Surrender Caucus" needs to stand down, and the "French Republicans" need to go take a bath and put on some deodorant.