We have all heard the famous phrase, “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” It denotes the idea that if something is working fine there is no need to change it. However, in this current day and age with the “boy” king in power, the adage transforms to “if it ain’t broke, break it so we can fix it how we want.” This “motto” gave us Obamacare, unfettered illegal immigration leading to “amnesty,” and the “war on coal.”
Now, the “problem” for the Obama administration is the portraits on the paper fiat currency, beginning with the ten-dollar bill. On Wednesday, the US Treasury Department announced that a new ten-dollar bill will no longer feature Alexander Hamilton sitting alone; but, will now have a woman featured alongside him.
According to The Blaze:
“The next generation of currency, starting with the new $10 note, will include various design features that celebrate democracy,” the Treasury said in a statement. “In keeping with that theme, Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew has decided that the new $10 note should feature a woman who was a champion for our inclusive democracy.”
Lew will announce who has been selected later this year. Eleanor Roosevelt, Harriet Tubman and Rosa Parks have all previously been suggested to be featured on US currency.
The bill is expected to be unveiled in 2020.
While the Treasury maintains this “change” is to “celebrate democracy,” the actual redesign is to prevent counterfeiting. The Advanced Counterfeit Deterrence Steering Committee recommended the redesign of the Ten-dollar bill in June 2013. To spread the word on the “change,” the Treasury urges individuals to tweet about the redesign and share what “democracy means to them” using “#TheNew10.”
At a time when the US economy is close to collapse, the Treasury Department proposes to spend money to redesign the ten-dollar bill to include a woman or replace Hamilton, which will cost more than just “updating to protect against counterfeiting.”
According to the Washington Post, the redesign, slotted to unveil in 2020, is celebrating the “100th anniversary of the right of women to vote.” The Treasury Department launched a public media campaign to solicit “suggestions” for who should be on the bill and what it should look like. The consideration for candidacy has two requirements: the woman is deceased, the woman embodies the theme of the bill’s new look — Democracy.
“America’s currency makes a statement about who we are and what we stand for as a nation,” said Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, who has the authority to make the decision.
The debate remains ongoing whether Hamilton will be totally replaced or have a woman in history pictured with him.
The Washington Post reported that earlier this year, discussion heated up over placing a woman on US currency. Some suggested replacing Andrew Jackson, who graces the Twenty-dollar bill, because of Jackson’s “authorization and enforcement of the Indian Removal Act of 1830, which forced several Native American tribes to give up their land to white farmers and move to what is now Oklahoma.” The campaign to change the portrait on the twenty-dollar bill resulted from a bill introduced by Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) in April to have a female face grace US currency. Known as “Women on 20s,” her suggested legislation resulted from “a movement calling for the overhaul of the $20 bill.”
Lew said the timing of the Treasury Department’s announcement was a “happy coincidence.” The $10 bill was already in line for a redesign, he said, and it will also incorporate
new security features.
Women have appeared on currency in the past. Martha Washington appeared on the “silver-dollar certificate” in the 1800s. Susan B. Anthony and Sacagawea appeared on a One-dollar coin for a brief time until discontinued by the US Mint for lack of popularity. In addition, a bill circulated in the 1900s featured Pocahontas in a group portrait.
Redesigns to prevent counterfeiting fail or the need for redesign every few years would not occur. Despite that little tidbit and at the risk of being labeled sexist, a prude, old fashioned, or any other name someone wants to apply, why place a woman alongside Alexander Hamilton or any other individual gracing US paper currency? Why replace the portraits of men with women? Of the minted bills in circulation now, all portraits on US paper currency are former presidents, except Alexander Hamilton who was the first Secretary of the Treasury and advocated for a national currency, and Benjamin Franklin, who was a signer of the Declaration of Independence.
The only president legislated to be on any currency is George Washington. All others are and were at the whim of the Treasury Secretary. According to the Department of Treasury website, the “basic face and back designs of all denominations of our paper currency in circulation today were selected in 1928, although they were modified to improve security against counterfeiting in 1996.” No records remain indicating why certain presidents and statesmen were chosen.
Women, especially feminists, need to get a grip. Is it not enough that the “women’s movement” has emasculated men? Are feminist women so “man hating” they want to eradicate significant historical male figures from paper currency? Or, has our nation decided that contributions made to this nation by “old dead men” are no longer valuable? It is probably a combination of all those.
What woman has achieved an accomplishment such as George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, or Alexander Hamilton? Lincoln graces the five-dollar bill, celebrated probably for his Emancipation Proclamation that freed no slaves, being President during the War to Enslave the States, and using the US military against US citizens. Who knows about Ulysses S. Grant. While women have contributed to society and changes in it–some not for the better—the founding of our nation, through its struggle for independence and establishment of our nation, rests in the hands of men. Some were great, some not so much.
What women or woman in history could grace the ten-dollar bill with Alexander Hamilton or replace him altogether? Let’s look at a few contenders.
Susan B. Anthony lobbied to get a legislation allowing women to vote. For some, that is equal to George Washington leading troops across the Potomac during the War for Independence. She contributed to a change in society, but it hardly equates to leading the colonial army to gain independence from Britain.
Margaret Sanger created what is now Planned Parenthood and supported killing babies in the womb, especially minority babies. What a marvelous contribution to society she made as an advocate for eugenics. It would be tantamount to placing a picture of Hitler on Israel’s currency.
Rosa Parks, a potential candidate, became the female face of the Civil Rights Movement for refusing to relinquish her seat and go to the back of the bus. She didn’t do anything new as others had refused to do the same — Claudette Colvin at age 16, nine months before Rosa Parks, refused to give up her seat and go to the back of the bus in Bronx, New York. Parks’s action garnered the attention of those who used it for further gain because she was a black woman in the South. She became the female “symbol” in support of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Harriet Tubman, also a nominee, led the Underground Railroad, helping slaves escape during the War to Enslave the States. This was an act of courage during a turbulent time by a black woman. She risked her life to lead approximately seventy families and friends to freedom.
Eleanor Roosevelt, identified as another potential candidate, assumed a forward role in the political scene to help her husband, President Franklin D. Roosevelt — a closet communist/socialist and creator of the “New Deal,” because of his disability due to poliomyelitis. She chaired the United Nations Commission on Human Rights from 1946 – 1951 after being appointed a delegate by then President Harry S. Truman. Her major role on the Commission resulted in the drafting and adopting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. Hillary Clinton considers Eleanor Roosevelt her heroine. Well, that does it for Eleanor for many — supporting the United Nations and being identified as Hillary’s heroine.
If you really want to celebrate women in history by placing one on currency alongside the current portrait, why not use Anna Strong, one of the women reportedly a member of Washington’s Culper Spy Ring during the War for Independence, who passed along messages to the other members by hanging her laundry a certain way? Another less well-known female of the War of Independence is Sybil Ludington, the 16-year-old daughter of Colonel Henry Ludington who rode 40 miles (twice that of Paul Revere) in the dead of night on April 26, 1777, to alert colonial forces of the British advance. A number of women from the American Revolution are perfect candidates, such as Abigail Adams whose ideas and comments in letters to her husband became part of our founding documents.
The seat of honor on US paper currency should be reserved for those who contributed significantly to the founding and continuing of this nation as a “constitutional republic” as outlined in our Constitution. Despite current charlatans trying to pass this nation off as a democracy, we are not. The portraits on our paper currency should remain as is. If it is determined a woman’s portrait should grace our paper currency, the woman should be placed alongside, indicating a supporting role, be of unquestionable historical significance to the founding or support of this nation as a constitutional republic and not a “symbol,” head or advocate of some “social” movement, or defining this nation as something other than it is. However, the decision rests in the hands of the Democrat, leftist, liberal ideologue in the Obama administration.