Chuck Grassley, 93, Doesn't Want a Democrat Picking His Successor

Chuck Grassley does not plan to die in office. He said so himself last week. But if he did, he does not want a Democratic governor choosing his successor.

That line landed hard when I read it over coffee this morning. Not because it was shocking. It was too plain for that. It landed because it put a quiet, human worry out in the open, the kind people usually keep to themselves. Grassley, the oldest sitting senator, said it at a Republican fundraiser in West Des Moines. He was talking about Iowa’s governor race this November.

One of the reasons I’m worried about who’s going to be elected governor, he told the crowd, I don’t plan on dying in office but if I did, I don’t want a Democrat governor choosing my successor.

The facts around this are simple, even if the feeling is not. Grassley is 93. He is serving his eighth term in the Senate. That term runs until January 2029. Under Iowa law, if a Senate seat opens up, the governor makes a temporary appointment to fill it until voters pick a permanent replacement in the next general election. That means whoever wins the governor’s race this fall would have the power to name Grassley’s replacement if something happens to him before 2028.

Right now, that race looks close. Democrat Rob Sand, the state auditor, has led in some recent polls. Republican Zach Lahn is running to keep the office in GOP hands. Current Governor Kim Reynolds is stepping down. So the stakes feel real on both sides. For Grassley, the stakes carry a personal edge. He said as much when he noted that at his age, he does not know how many more groups of Republicans he will get to talk to.

I kept thinking about what this says, not about parties, but about how people face the end of their time in a job they have held for decades. Grassley has been in Congress since 1958. That is a long run. Most people do not get to see one career stretch that far, let alone one with this much weight. It makes sense that he would think about who comes after him. It makes sense that he would want that person to share his views.

What gave me pause was the way he framed it. Not as a policy argument. Not as a pitch for his party’s platform. He tied his worry directly to his own mortality, in front of a room full of donors. That is blunt. It is also honest in a way that feels rare in politics now. Too often, candidates and officials talk around the hard parts. They dress everything up in slogans. Grassley did not do that. He named the thing he feared, even if it made for an awkward moment.

And yet, I found myself wondering if this was the right note to strike. There is a difference between being honest and making your own fragility a campaign argument. Voters are already anxious about a lot. They do not need their elders reminding them, in public, that death could reshuffle the Senate. Especially when that elder is as prominent as Grassley. He chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee. His presence matters in Washington. His absence would too.

At the same time, I get why he said it. Iowa Republicans are feeling pressure this cycle. National polls show the party trailing. Some strategists have talked about a possible wipeout in midterm states. In that context, Grassley’s comment works as a motivator. It tells the base that every vote counts, even in races that might seem far from the Senate floor. It says the governor’s office is not just about state issues. It can shape the balance of power in Congress.

But there is a cost to that kind of messaging. It leans into fear. It asks people to vote not for what they want, but against what they dread. That can work in the short term. It can also leave a sour taste afterward. People want to feel like they are building something, not just holding the line against loss. Grassley’s remark, for all its honesty, leans hard into the latter.

I also thought about the people who will read this and feel uneasy for a different reason. Not because they disagree with Grassley’s politics. But because they see themselves in him. An older worker, maybe, who has given decades to one job. Who knows their time there is finite. Who worries about who will take over when they are gone. That is a universal concern. It does not belong to one party or one ideology. It belongs to anyone who has ever cared about their work.

In that light, Grassley’s comment feels less like a partisan jab and more like a human moment that got caught in a political crossfire. He was trying to make a point about the governor’s race. He ended up saying something that reaches beyond it. That does not make it right or wrong. It just makes it worth sitting with for a minute.

The governor’s race in Iowa will be decided in November. The Senate seat Grassley holds will be on the ballot in 2028, unless something changes before then. Until then, he plans to keep working. He said he does not plan on dying in office. I hope he does not. But if he does, Iowa’s next governor will have the duty to name his replacement. That is the law. That is the system. And now, thanks to Grassley, it is also a worry that voters will carry with them to the polls.