Are any of you actively involved with the Citizens Coin Advisory Committee? It seems that with all the distaste for moderns that some of you are or may want to be. I'm not too sure to what extent or pulling power CCAC has with the US Treasury to produce actual results. But maybe they do (if so, by how much?). Is the floor given for everyday citizens to speak and weigh-in with their thoughts and ideas? Here's an excerpt from the most recent meeting's minutes: Prior to the review of designs the Committee discussed and acted on a series of six (6) motions the Committee believes will support and further program success. All six (6) motions received unanimous support from the Committee and include, • Recommendation to use a 40.6 mm standard diameter planchet for the silver medal in order to balance maximization of the palette for eye appeal with the requirement for a one (1) ounce silver weight. • Recommendation that the relief measurement of the silver medal be maximized to the fullest possible extent and in excess of the relief established for the obverse of the $1 American Silver Eagle. • Recommendation that the gold coin utilize the denomination “One Union” historically envisioned to represent $100 on United States coinage. • Recommendation that the United States Mint’s two (2) numismatic production facilities (i.e. San Francisco and West Point) be utilized to assure solid supply and interest for the collecting community. • Recommendation that the edge of the silver proof medal be reeded to give the piece its best presentation. • Recommendation that the Liberty-themed silver medal be an ongoing annual series in order to satisfy the anticipated strong reception in the collector community and to allow Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee 801 Ninth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20220 C CAC United States Mint artists to fully develop the multi-cultural aspects of the new, modern Liberty Judging by how this one meeting went, CCAC seems "agreeable". Maybe they'll strongly consider requests for changes such as these for business and proof strike coinage, if and when that's on the agenda. Maybe it'd be effective to collectively mandate new designs to be "true to form and spirit" as classic coins' designs, but with modern proof strike-ability. Though, some of the recommendations are too vague to be effective enough for any meaningful consideration, such as point number four. So unless specific examples of CCAC-led design introduction and the US Mint's implementation of that design are made, along some level of consistency of US Treasury approval, I'm not sure what to make of CCAC. http://ccac.gov/
I find it funny that I just bought the morgan designed $100 union coin and now they want to resurrect that term. #StrangeCoincidences
They were discussing it a bit prior to your purchase as those recommendations were in regards to the 2015 UHR 1 oz gold Liberty coin; from the February, 2015 meeting. The mint did also go ahead and use the $100 denomination but didn't denote it one 'union'. Based on the final design I'm glad they didn't call it a 'union' as at least it left the door open for them to perhaps revisit it in the future and use an actual or modified Morgan design.
I meant coincidental to me not in general. And the HR liberty was my first thought. I'm glad if union was in contention back then that they chose to go with $100 instead. I think union will just cause confusion. I don't think resurrecting it would be a good idea personally. Like making a 2016 recast of a 1980's movie. (I will NOT be going to see the new Point Break any time soon. That's for sure)
Roger Burdette was a member of that committee for a while. It basically sounded like they were useless bureaucracy, and had little pull. They'd give their recommendations, and the mint would do as it pleased.
