Confirmation should wait for the election

I am a longtime conservative Republican. While I have no fondness for Donald Trump, I would prefer that he, rather than Joe Biden nominate the next Supreme Court Justice.

To be fair, ethical and even handed, however, that nomination should be made by the winner of the November election, following the process of 2016. Justice Scalia died eight-and-a-half months before the 2016 election. Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland was delayed pending the election that year. It seems that the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley, determined that, in an election year, that decision ought to be made by whoever was elected later in the year - so he refused to have a hearing on that nomination. If the same procedure is to be followed here, the nomination should await the outcome of this election. So far there seems to be a groundswell of Senate Republicans anxious to nominate and confirm a candidate before the winner takes office in January.

Where is the sense of equal protocol? Are Senate Republicans to sidestep fair play and ram through a nominee? Will none speak out for fairness? The first and obvious spokesman for impartial procedures ought to be Chuck Grassley - the roadblock to the nomination in 2016.

Dick Roggensack

Waukon