Just announced Reagan on $10 Bill

Don't give up. Write to other congressmen. Write to the sponsers of the bills.

Believe me, every phone call and email makes a difference.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The Franklin Half was supposed to have at least 10 more years, but they got Congress to break the 25-year rule for JFK, so nothing really is "permanent".

However, it will probably make it much more difficult to change designs because an act of congress would be needed to undo the "permanent" status of the coins.

It's amazing how short-sighted Congress is, given they want to stick future generations with dead presidents on coins. But not surprising.

 

The Franklin Half is an exception. The law reads that the mint cannot change a design before it has circulated for at least 25 years without congressional approval. These past designs were not permanent. The only coin currently that has the permanent design is the 2006 Jefferson-Monticello nickel. So what does permanent mean? What it effectively means is that the treasurer will not be able to change the design without a new law. This goes against 200 years of coin law in America.

 

Whatever your political leanings, I think that it is right to give credit to Reagan for his service and to mourn his passing.

That said, I've got to admit I'm pretty tired of this prolonged conservative effort at revisionist history. This continuing effort to deify a modern-era President (Reagan on Mt. Rushmore? Surely you jest!) seems incredibly disingenuous and politically motivated. The reverence afforded to those that occupy the hallowed places on our currency and major national monuments should not be cheapened in an effort to fabricate a historical legacy that the Republican party can use in election campaigns in coming years. Only history can judge whether a leader deserves such reverence, and we do not yet have sufficient historical perspective to properly evaluate Reagan.

I was born and raised in DC, and the airport is still "Washington National" to me.

Dymaxion

 

Well I hope that our coins and currency will return to the point of beauty and inspiration for all. Honoring leaders and politics should be left to other venues.

 

Reagan on the same level as Washington, Jefferson and Hamilton? That's a laugh.
I hate to speak of the dead, but he chose public life, and honoring him in the same way as we do our Founding Fathers is ridiculous.
I have contacted my representitives and asked them to not support this legislation.

 

Can't we all get get get along....

I am pround call myself a right wing fiscal conservative and I would love to buy my fellow liberal friends (though they don't admit they are liberal...instead they use terms like progressive or moderate) an adult beverage to discuss politics with you. Usually us Republicans have to buy since most Democrats believe we don't pay enough taxes and we need to "invest" in the children, seniors (quick, get me a tissue as I cry) and the future of more government programs. But that is another discussion so I will keep my post to the matter at hand.

I can see the hostility that is going to arise when the discussion comes up for Presidents to grace our coinage and currency will NEVER go away. I wish I was around to see the Southerners go crazy when Lincoln first graced the penny. I am sure they went ballistic as I would if Bill Clinton were to be found in my loose change.

With that said...all this is the reason why dead or living people should NOT be on coins and currency. Maybe...if they have been dead for 100 years so history can disect them, but NO MORE!

Lady Liberty can be designed in so many beautiful designs that even Teddy Roosevelt would be pround. If any President that understood beauty in our coinage was this President!

I am writing to my representatives with full color pictures of our past coinage. Hopefully, they may hit a nerve as they "reach across the aisle" for a bi-partisan coinage design.

Until then...before you raise your voice, reinforce your argument!

 

Not to disagree with you, Ed, but controversy isn't the reason that dead presidents should not be on our coins. At least not in my opinion.

Liberty should grace our coins because she is the chosen representative for our republic. The eagle embodies our spirit as a nation. No matter how great one is, they cannot rise above the greatness of our republic.

We have always been controversial. We told the King and Queen to shove off, displaced a nation of honorable people for our land, etc. To make some factions of the public comfortable with our coinage has no matter in my mind.

The average American needs to reach into their pocket, grab a handful of Liberty's and remember what our great country is all about. They don't need to look at a persona and either beem, frown or look puzzled trying to place that person into history.

My $0.02!
Cris

 

A well thought response Cris.

I may tell that to Mr. Castle tomorrow morning.

 

When you meet with Mr Castle, you have logic, reason, tradition, and history on your (and most of our) side. Good luck! Be prepared to SHOW him designs because he will likely retain this information more so than listening to your appeal.

Let us know and good luck!

 

He has seen many rare and beautiful coins, along with many beautiful concepts offered. Mr. Castle is interested in change, (which is a good thing), now it is just a matter of pointing him in the right direction.
Several senators are now attempting to lock in the Sac design. Seems like if it isn't one thing, it's another.
I will continue to keep everyone informed here on CoinTalk.

Thanks for all of you that have chosen to voice your opinions to your local elected officials. It does make a difference.

 

I support this bill. I find that many of our coinage series are getting quite boring being the same for soooo long. I think it's a fitting tribute and I don't see anything wrong with having a modern times president on a coin.

 

ND, any update on the status?

 

I haven't heard anything new yet. I think our coinage should have figures that represent the modern times instead of the presidents from a century ago. Sure they were very important, but in general i'd like to see some modernization.

 

I have to respectfully disagree with you on this one. Modern Presidents (though I am a huge Reagan fan) should NOT be on our coinage. Our founding fathers insisted upon this and it wasn't until 1909 (after they were all dead) that Lincoln graced the penny (much to the dismay of the southern folks).

I for one would be just sick if I ever see Clinton (either one) on our coins. Want commemorative coins with their likeness? Knock yourself out. Make your own for all I care. But for our regular mint issue strikes...not a good idea.

There are plenty designs with Liberty and Eagles that depict America with everything that an American coin should represent...that is Freedom, Liberty and her Majasty! It is a message that should be conveyed to the world. Too many people would read into a coin's message if we had somebody like Carter or Nixon grace our coinage.

 

Well the swing seems to be that the dollar has a new uphill battle. A full house vote is coming, but the senate has a stumbling block or two.
I have joined camp with a few who desire mandating change every 25 years.

The Reagan dime seems to be a forgone conclusion though. Many bills are in the process. I don't think that anyone will stop this from happening.

2005 could see the new dime.

 

I know I'm repeating myself. But I don't think we have to do everything the Founding Father wanted. The Fathers were right about a great many things. They also got a couple things wrong. (Like slavery?) If the American people want real humans on their coins, who they admire and want their kids to respect, then so be it. Let your congressmen and senators know how you feel. But how about we decide and not worry about what GW may or may not have wanted.

 

On the record...

Nancy is on record stating she would be very uncomfortable with Ron on the dime...especially booting off Roosevelt.

Need to tell Mr Castle to take a deep breath and THINK what they are about to do. What happened to the 25 year rule?