“Last-Minute Mercy—or Abuse of Power? Kentucky Voters Decide Tuesday”

Focus on Politics | TW Shortt Reports
By T.W. Shortt, CRS®, CRB®, GRI®
Principal Broker, REALTY WORLD Knox Realty Group, LLC — The Fort Knox Office™
Former Radcliff City Councilman

When Kentuckians vote on November 3, they will face a constitutional question that deserves attention before they enter the voting booth: Should a governor’s power to grant pardons have a temporary closing time?

The proposed amendment would change Section 77 of the Kentucky Constitution. It would prohibit the governor from granting pardons, commuting sentences, or granting reprieves beginning 60 days (about 2 months) before a gubernatorial election and continuing through the fifth Tuesday after that election—the beginning of the next gubernatorial term. The governor would retain those powers outside of that period.

Responsible government requires both authority and accountability. Public confidence depends on knowing officials exercise their powers fairly, even in the final days of an administration.

What do these powers mean?

A pardon grants legal forgiveness for a criminal offense. A commutation reduces a sentence without overturning the conviction. A reprieve postpones punishment.

These powers recognize that the justice system can make mistakes, and that extraordinary circumstances may justify mercy. Voters must decide whether to allow a brief period when a governor cannot exercise them.

Why is this on the ballot?

Sen. Chris McDaniel, the proposal sponsor, says his effort followed the controversial pardons and commutations former Gov. Matt Bevin issued at the end of his term in 2019.

The concern is understandable: An outgoing governor can make consequential decisions after voters have already chosen the next administration. At that point, the ordinary accountability of another election has little practical force.

But a blanket restriction presents another concern. A deserving application for mercy—or an urgent request to postpone punishment—could arise during the prohibited period. The amendment does not distinguish a politically motivated decision from a well-supported one.

What does your vote mean?

A YES vote supports adding the temporary restriction.

A NO vote leaves the governor’s existing constitutional authority in place.

This restriction would apply to governor elections, not every general election. The existing requirement that applications and the governor’s reasons remain open to public inspection would continue.

To me, the question deserves more consideration than which political party occupies the governor’s office. Constitutional rules should be written with future administrations in mind.

Before voting, ask yourself: Does preventing potential abuse during a transfer of power justify suspending an important instrument of mercy?

Kentucky voters will make that decision.

Read the complete proposal on the Kentucky Secretary of State’s website.