Commentary on Current U.S. Coins

An article I wrote will be published in the Spring edition of The Italian American Perspective, the newsletter of the Italian American Cultural Center of Pennsylvania, entitled “Italian American Artists Beautify U.S. Coinage.” The article’s publication and recent changes to the design of the Lincoln Cent reminded me of my interest in providing historical and political commentary on current regular issue United States coins.

One of the most successful bills passed by Congress in modern times was the one that established the 50 State Quarters program in 1999, which was extended to include the District of Columbia and the territories this year. Throughout American numismatic history, coin designs were changed about once every generation. However, current U.S. coin designs had remained largely unchanged for decades, which caused American coins to become so ordinary as to be unnoticed and unappreciated by the general public. The Washington Quarter, for example, was first minted in 1932 and remained mostly unchanged until the State Quarters program. The program not only represented changes in designs, but produced coins that were educational, promoted the interests of the states and inspired coin-collecting among the broader population (in other words, not just change for the sake of change). As a result, the program has produced a profit to the U.S. of billions of dollars.

The year after the debut of the State Quarters program, the U.S. began minting a new design for a dollar coin, the Sacagawea Dollar. Dollar coins, which had not been minted from 1981-1999, are intended to save costs because they last much longer than paper dollar notes. However, dollar coins have usually not circulated widely throughout American history. The Sacagawea Dollar, as a result, has been criticized as a bust because it seldom circulates, but part of the reason is because the public hoards it – the same reason that Kennedy Half Dollars rarely have been seen in circulation. The Sacagawea design is an improvement over the Anthony Dollar of 1979-1981. The Anthony Dollar was smaller than the Half Dollar even though it had the same composition, which seemed to be emblematic of the high inflation of the administration of President Jimmy Carter. The selection of Anthony, a woman’s rights advocate, instead of a figure of more general historical importance, seemed also to represent the typical liberal patronizing of the period. Therefore, the public rejected the Anthony Dollar. The Sacagawea design, in contrast, appears golden in color because of its unique composition. Sacagawea, the Shoshone guide to Lewis and Clark, is a figure of major significance who represents friendship between Native Americans and European immigrants. The Sacagawea design is also much more beautiful than the Anthony design. Sacagawea’s unusual over-the-shoulder, smiling glance seems to beckon us like she did Lewis and Clark to reach for the next frontier. The reverse featured a majestic flying eagle. However the new design will feature a Native American at work in a field, and the coin has been renamed the “Native American Dollar.”

I note there was some thought in considering the Sacagawea design of representing the allegorical figure of Liberty that traditionally graced American coinage instead of a specific person. I recall a black woman on the committee tasked with approving coin designs complaining that no images of Native Americans had ever appeared on U.S. coins. Apparently, she must have been unfamiliar with the Buffalo Nickel and the Indian Head Half and Quarter Eagles. At least in Sacagawea, a Native American of general historical significance was selected. Alas, the new Presidential Dollars feature images of the Statue of Liberty on their reverses, instead of the traditional Liberty. Thus, the coins feature a symbol of a symbol instead of just the symbol, which probably both reflects and promotes ignorance about the figure of Liberty.

Recent changes to the reverse designs of the Jefferson Nickel, which had been mostly unchanged since its introduction in 1938, to commemorate the bicentennial of the Lewis and Clark expedition were good, but except for a change to the portrait of Thomas Jefferson on the obverse, the coins have returned mostly to their previous design. New reverse designs are being minted for the Lincoln Cent to commemorate the bicentennial of Abraham Lincoln’s birth, but the obverse has remained mostly unchanged since its introduction in 1909. Like the Washington Quarter, the continuation of part of these coin designs demonstrates resistance to the tradition of changing coins once every generation or so.

More importantly, the Lincoln Cent violates an American tradition of not placing images of individuals on coins, which is why Liberty was preferred, so that coins would be unitive and not disunitive. It may be acceptable to put Founding Fathers on coins, but placing images of favored presidents of whatever political party controls Congress is a practice that ought to end. Indeed, I oppose the new Presidential Dollar series not so much because of the disappointing reverse image, but because it is inappropriate to treat all presidents equally. I hope that the series would terminate before Bill Clinton, who had protested against the U.S. on foreign soil, is ever honored on American coinage.

I call for a return to Liberty!