I’d rather not have either. Having presidents from my childhood on our currency is just a little odd considering it usually features really, really dead people. What did people think of the JFK coin? He’d still been “recently dead” at the time, right?
Actually, as his Wikipedia article points out: “While Jackson did not start the ‘spoils system,’ he did indirectly encourage its growth for many years to come.”
Hmm, my bf is Native American and I spend a lot of time with Native Americans.
No, they don’t avoid $20.00 bills.
I like Bill Clinton, but don’t think that he should be on money. He should be on interns! 
As for Reagan, he was the biggest spending and tax raising President of all time. I did not like him. But he wasn’t as big a racist douche as Jackson, so I say replace Jackson on the $20 with Reagan. This will make the pubbies cream themselves. It will make me happy because I will thereafter deface every $20 bill by putting a little Hitler mustache on the portrait, a swastika on the seal and stamp a web address whypubbiesarefascists.com and make a great living off Google ad traffic. Seriously.
. . . but no one said they didn’t . . . we were listing things named after Reagan, which also included buildings and airports, which other presidents also have named after them.
Why would you want to demote him? Then it would no longer be all about the Benjamins.
With the currency going to multiple colors it has to be somebody that can compete with the background.
- Cindy Lauper from her peek.
- Boy George from his peek.
- Dolly Parton when she was big in both ways.
Reagan would require me to draw horns and a gotee on the bill.
In both cases, too soon and they’re both too controversial.
Personally, the deification of Reagan annoys me deeply. While the poor man was lying on his death bed (and I wouldn’t wish death from Alzheimer’s disease on anyone), already then some of his fans in Congress were arguing for taking FDR off the dime and replacing him with Reagan! Get serious. Roosevelt on the dime is possibly the most apt match between person and piece of currency that I’ve ever heard of. The whole proposal was transparently political.
If the US changed its currency more often, like most countries do, it wouldn’t be such a big deal. But when the same figures are on the same denomination for entire lifetimes, changing them is serious business and it ought to be something that enjoys broad popular support.
Exactly. Forget presidents, we want The KING.
Not a fan of Reagan, but he was a very popular and influential President, so I think he probably should go on the currency at some point. Though I generally approved of the Clinton presidency, he just doesn’t seem “big” enough to go on currency after he dies…he did a good job in general, but I don’t think he’s going to be seen as important as Reagan in the future.
And why is Grant on the fifty? What about good ol’ Teddy Roosevelt?
How about an entire redesign of the currency: Rainbow Brite on the $1, the Care Bears on the $5, Smurfs on the $10…
young Elvis or old Elvis?
Be careful. You do not want to arouse the wrath of the Society for the Protection and Enhancement of the Reputation of Millard Fillmore, Last Of the Whigs.*
[sub]*Warning: do not use the acronym in polite company.[/sub]
Putting Reagan one a dollar coin would be fine. It would be about the same as not putting his face on money. We could put Sacagawea on the opposite side just to be sure nobody can indicate the coin while speaking. Scagcochowega???
As long as everybody is hatin’ on Andrew Jackson, they should be aware that the Grant administration probably did at least as much harm to Native Americans.
I’ll say what I always say in these threads: replace Jackson with Davy Crockett. A fine symbol of the American frontier, with extra bonus points for having opposed the Cherokee removal while he was a member of Congress. (In fact, that’s mostly what cost him his seat. And when he lost his seat, he went to Texas, and we all know what happened to him there. So in a very indirect way, his opposition to Indian removal cost him his life.)
I think Grant did more than Teddy, if not as president, then in subduing the godless Southerners in the Civil War. I still recall Mark Twain’s account of the entire local population lining the roads as his coffin was conveyed to New York City. Teddy was a colorful, flamboyant figure, but what exactly did he accomplish that was of substance?
If we’re going to be pointing fingers at every administration under which the Indians got a raw deal, then you can probably forget putting any presidents on the currency.
Are you serious?
A short list:
As it pertains to this thread, I will mention that he put Lincoln on the Penny.
It was Theodore that really put the US on the world stage as a major player.
He appointed Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. to the Supreme court. I believe many consider him the greatest of US Justices.
Nobel Peace Prize as President for ending the Russo-Japanese War.
He pushed the Pure Food and Drug Act and Meat Inspection Act and got both passed.
His record of trust busting without disrupting economic growth.
The Hepburn act reigned in many of the excesses of the Robber Barons.
He effectively created out National Park System and establish the first bird preserve in the US. He did establish the National Park service.
He eliminated Yellow Fever in many American held lands like Cuba, PI and Panama Canal Zone. Speaking of which the Panama Canal was an impressive accomplishment in and of itself.
He ensured the Navy would grow into a true World Class Navy.
He also sent the existing Great White Fleet on a world tour that demonstrated our growing power and help settle some tensions in Asia.
He helped race relations a bit. The first black man to eat dinner at the White House was his guest, Booker T. Washington. This might seem minor, but the outcry, especially from the southern states was such that sadly it was years before another Black man would dine at the White House. He also appointed the first Jew to the Cabinet.
As for his Nobel, I’ve always heard he was not really deserving of it. It wasn’t like, say, giving it to Kissinger, but my understanding is he did not really play that much of a hand in negotiations.
…
I agree about the politicians. They should definitely be completely left out.
However, every category but one that you listed are merely entertainers, manipulators, advertisers or interior decorators.
The only ones who are worthy of appearing on any currency or stamp are those who have helped advance science (of the ‘hard science’ kind), no other.