I’ve been thinking about this. Assuming we decided to kick somebody of their bill, who should it be? And if we do, who would replace him?
For me, I’d definatly nominate Jackson. Simply Put: Indian Removal Act and The Trail of Tears. The closet thing approaching US government sponsered Genocide in our history, and defing the SCOTUS as well.
Grant is also in the running, but his problem seemed to be more political incompetence then anything else.
However, the problem of who to replace them with then becomes the big problem. Nominate Reagen, a favorite of the Right, and the Left will throw a fit. Same thing by the Right if Roosevelt is nominated. So who could you pick as both a Great American President or Statesmen who would have a reasonable chance of replacing whoever was kicked off?
Assuming you mean Franklin Roosevelt, he is already on the dime, and he really ought to be on something: he is unquestionably one of the most significant figures in American history. But I think it would be kind of neat to see Teddy Roosevelt’s face on a bill.
And how about John Adams? Of all the Founding Fathers, he seems to get short shrift; if Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, and Franklin get to be on money, why can’t he? And Madison too, for that matter.
Part of me thinks Martin Luther King Jr. might be good, but to the other part of me this feels totally wrong, because King never served this country in an official capacity, i.e. he was never part of the government, and money is an official, governmentally-created sort of thing. The same argument would hold against people of cultural significance. (Otherwise, Mark Twain maybe? For God’s sake, please, no Elvis!)
Dang it, I’m getting too frivolous here! This is supposed to be a Great Debate, and I’m treating it like an IMHO. Oh well.
Putting Reagan on something wouldn’t be any worse than putting Kennedy on the half dollar.
I think Dr. King would make a great choice. There is no rule that the person represented on US money has to have been a president, and we’ve probably used up all our good presidents already. Merit often has little to do with how high up the political ladder you’ve climbed, as anyone who’s been awake recently knows.
Well, MLK was instrustmental in the Civil rights movement, while Mark Twain, while a funny guy and interesting author, never reached that level of importance on the national scene. I think there’s a difference between being a celebrity and actually being an important part of American history/politics. MLK is arguably important in that manner, while Elvis and Mark Twain are not.
I can see why one might prefer to decorate bills with the visages of people who have officially served their country. However, I don’t think that should be a rule that’s written in stone. And I think that what Martin Luther King Jr. did for his country, “official” or not, is certainly worth commemorating on US money.
I say ditch presidents altogether and put Star Trek characters on the bill. Kirk on the $1, Bones on the $2, Spock on the $5, Sulu on the $10, Scotty on the $20, Uhura on the $50 and Checkov on the $100.
Okay, dumb idea. But they’re still all more deserving the U.S. Grant!