Should a portrait of Martin Luther King Jr. replace Andrew Jackson’s
on $20 Federal Reserve notes?
The Atlantic's Conor Friedersdorf wrote about that very topic
in an online article posted June 12, as did Slate's Jillian Keenan on
READ: Writers advocate taking Andrew Jackson's portrait
off $20 FRNs, replace with Martin Luther King Jr.
Coin World took the question to its Facebook fans earlier
this week and got plenty of opinions from those in favor of the
change, those against it, and even those who don't think anyone should
be on our currency.
Here are a few of the responses we received:
Timothy Benedict: "I could support that change. Change
the reverse to a depiction of his I have a dream speech at
Washington Monument and we have a new bill."
Karl Howard: "No way. Presidents only. And dead ones at
Jas Trent: "I think mlk would say no thats why i say no.
He knew it would be about his skin color and not him. He was a great
Richie Stinchcomb: "Absolutely NOT!!! Personally, I
don't think anyone should have a portrait on currency. It should be
a generic representation such as Lady Liberty, eagles, buffaloes,
Kathy Leaphart: "They need to look better not worse we
have such beautiful artwork why not a beautiful scene or animals not
another Stoic portrait!"
Gary Geiser: "There are bills without a President
already. Hamilton, Chase. Frankly, it is just a scrap of paper
Brad James: "No. I'm sick of Congress messing with the
look of our money, it's as bad as the multicolored play money the
Wayne Kwasniewski: "Not a bad idea"
Mark Conway Munro: "Remove the people from all
denominations and replace them with concepts such as liberty,
justice, industry, rights, equality, etc. We need to hold these
ideals up higher than even the best of our past elected leaders and
cultural heroes who embodied them."
Michael Warner: "No. 'If there has to be another
portrait on currency...' put him or her on a $200 bill. Leave the
$20 as it is."
Robert Nelson Jones: "No. I would be better to create an
eighty Dollar Bill instead."
Stephanie Welborn Owens: "MLK; while a great
humanitarian, already has a street in every city and a national
holiday devoted to his memory. He would not have wanted to be on
money. Let the portraits of founding fathers or many of our nation's
landmarks be on currency."
Douglas Jurgens: "We saw what happened when they put
Susan B Anthony on the dollar coin. Everyone hated them and they
were a wasteful endeavor. Not everyone will agree with what
important figures in American history are the best to represent the
whole of the country, but the pandering to special interest groups
needs to stop."
Chuck Chinici: "We're the only major country in the
world that still honors government leaders on our currency (the
Queen of England is a symbol and not a government leader). I say
take all Presidents and Founding Fathers off our currency and
replace them with allegorical concepts of liberty or non-military
events/symbols in American history (eagle, buffalo, flag, Statue of
Liberty, Transcontinental RR, Lewis & Clark, California Gold
Strike, Erie Canal, etc.) like we had in the late 1800s. Grant ($50)
and Jackson ($20) were two of the worst presidents in our history
while, although great presidents, Washington and Jefferson, both
Southern plantation owners, practiced slavery. If we avoid putting
historical figures, we avoid future debate over their merits. Just a
thought from a 44 year U.S. History instructor."
Vernon Peterson: "~ Why not change the reverse side of
the $5 Note, and place his "I Have A Dream" speech inside
the Dome & Outside the Dome some vignettes of the Civil
Phil N. Molé: "Yes, as soon as possible."
Maximus Decimus Meridius: "I personally would rather see
them all gone off of our money and replaced with a nice vignette
similar to what the old rail road and mining stocks used in the
early to mid 1900’s."
Add your opinion in the comment section below!