- checking login information
The Politics Cause
293,233 people care about Politics
Loading...All about the Ronalds: Republican Lawmaker Wants Reagan on the $50 Bill
You’ll be pleased to learn that yesterday, Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC) introduced legislation to put Ronald Reagan on the fifty dollar bill, replacing the late Ulysses S. Grant, who has been dead far longer than Reagan and whose contributions to ending slavery, preserving the Union, and winning the civil war are thus largely forgotten.
McHenry should be commended for taking time to introduce such legislation. I mean it’s not like our political system is in free-fall or something. Or that he has more important things to do, like voting against health care or the extension of unemployment benefits.
Reagan, you see, is an American hero, unlike that slacker Grant. As McHenry said in his press release,
Every generation needs its own heroes. . . . President Reagan was a modern day statesman, whose presidency transformed our nation’s political and economic thinking. Through both his domestic and international policies he renewed America’s self confidence, defeated the Soviets and taught us that each generation must provide opportunity for the next.
So why does McHenry think Reagan is better than Grant? After all, many of the arguments McHenry makes in favor of Reagan could also be made for Grant. Reagan may have “transformed our thinking,” but Grant, along with Lincoln was one of the guys that helped make sure there was a still a country to transform, much less have its self-confidence renewed.
But don’t worry, McHenry has another argument up his sleeve, one that’s sure to convince you that Reagan would kick Grant’s sorry butt.
A poll.
Really.
From McHenry’s press release:
In polls of presidential scholars, President Reagan consistently outranks President Grant. In 2005, The Wall Street Journal conducted one such poll of bipartisan scholars which ranked President Reagan 6th and President Grant 29th.
You can’t make this stuff up folks.
But it did make me wonder. What if we based who appears on our money entirely on rankings? There are thirteen separate denominations in U.S. currency (six coins and seven paper). Who would get the honor if we went solely by rankings of Presidents?
To begin with, Grant isn’t on the money because of his service as President. By all accounts he was a lousy President — although he’s no longer regarded as one of the worst. But he was kinda sorta maybe really responsible for leading the Union forces to victory in the Civil War. So using a comparative analysis of Presidents as the basis for excluding Grant pretty much misses the reason why he was honored in the first place.
In addition, there are four other individuals whose faces are on the money for things they did other than being President: Susan B. Anthony, Sacagawea, Alexander Hamilton, and some guy named Franklin. I guess if McHenry has his way, it won’t be all about the Benjamins anymore.
Now let’s turn to that “bipartisan” Wall Street Journal poll, which dates to 2000 (and thus excludes, Obama, Dubya, and Clinton). Here are the top thirteen, who, if we were to use McHenry’s reasoning, would be on our money.
1. George Washington
2. Abraham Lincoln
3. Franklin D. Roosevelt
4. Thomas Jefferson
5. Teddy Roosevelt
6. Andrew Jackson
7. Harry Truman
8. Ronald Reagan
Wait — wasn’t Reagan 6th in McHenry’s press release? What happened? Did he lose to Purdue, costing him valuable points among the historians? Because, you know, ranking Presidents means about as much as ranking college football teams without a playoff — it’s entirely subjective and utterly meaningless.
Sigh.
Anyway, here’s the rest of the list:
9. Dwight Eisenhower
10. James K. Polk
11. Woodrow Wilson
12. Grover Cleveland
13. John Adams
That’s right. According to McHenry’s reasoning, Grover Cleveland would be a better person to put on our money than Benjamin Franklin. Or, for that matter, John F. Kennedy, who comes in 18th, just behind Lyndon Johnson and just ahead of William H. Taft.
But the best part of this ranking nonsense is that McHenry (or more accurately, whoever in his office wrote this up) failed to click on another part of the same WSJ poll entitled “overrated Presidents,” where Reagan is ranked second — just behind Kennedy. Of course to be fair, there’s a third page entitled “underrated Presidents that ranks Reagan first — right ahead of Calvin Coolidge.
In reality, your politics will dictate whether or not you think this is a good idea. If you’re a conservative, you’ll probably favor it. If you’re a liberal, you probably won’t. I only hope that if you’re a fiscal conservative, you’ll at least recognize how much it would cost to take every Grant 50 out of circulation and replace it with a Reagan 50 — especially given the fact that the U.S. Mint already has done that twice in the past 15 years in order to introduce bills more resistant to increasingly sophisticated counterfeiting operations.
I wonder if McHenry is aware that a 2010 $50 bill is worth the equivalent of $27.30 in 1988 dollars (the last full year of Reagan’s presidency). If McHenry had only waited a couple more years, its value very well could have been down to $20, and we could have gotten rid of that jerk Andrew Jackson instead.
Read more: congress, economy, politics, ronald-reagan
Photo: Noellium via Flickr, using a CC BY-SA 2.0 license
Charles J. Brown is Senior Fellow and Washington Director at the Institute for International Law and Human Rights and the host of Undiplomatic, a blog on the intersection of foreign policy, politics, and pop culture. You also can follow him on Twitter.
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may
not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.
Recent Comments from Causes
Carol, you definitely need to go back to school. Criminal trespass is the act of entering a property…
I agree with Pam and BMutiny absolutely.
From an article on cbc.ca: "A lot of times when you go climb these mountains you sign what's called a…
meet our writers
224 comments
+ add your ownWhile people froze on the streets of big & small towns, Nancy Reagan orderes 18 sets of china - )that's place settings for 50).
Biggest oil disaster in history, Exxon "Valdez," off Alaska would have been avoided if Reagan didn't cut staff of Coast Guard special monitoring station. Absolutely true. -- fmr. Guardsman
IF THEY WANT TO PUT A RONALD ON THE $50.BILL , MAYBE THEY SHOULD CONSIDER PUTTING RONALD MCDONALD ON THE BILL.
As someone who didn't particularly admire President Reagan, I have to admit that the man was popular, and putting him onto some kind of currency makes sense. On the other hand, in order to avoid bring politics into yet another sphere it doesn't belong, one should probably replace two of them at once (Reagan and Kennedy?).
As to Grover Cleveland being a good president to put on a bill. Isn't he already on the $1000? (which isn't really a circulating bill, but who's counting)
Michael Cozens - I doubt that Reagan's presence had any effect of EXTENDING the cold was. That said I don't think he had much, if any, influence shortening it either. I recall a couple of articles appearing in the NY Times around '81 saying that the CIA estimated that the Soviet economy would collapse in about 3-4 years.
As to him antagonizing the Soviets: Their antagonism was already built in into their dogma.
As to the rest: Could I postulate a theory?:
- - If you have a dogma it has to bark & snarl at someone - -
I'm surprised nobody commented on my previous post :-)
Anyone remembers Ollie North and the Iran Contras, and the wars in El Salvador and Nicaragua, the Cia and whatever else was going on during those 8 years, plus the 4 years with papa Bush????
Forget about Reagan antagonizing the big, bad USSR; don't forget that he hated them so much that he paid this group called the Taliban in Afghanistan so they could fight the Soviets.
Thanks for all you did to help develop a terrorist group, Ronnie!!!
Better yet, instead of putting his face on currency, how about a bidding war between Charmin and Cottonelle? That would be a much better place for his face.
If anything, Reagan extended the Cold War by needlessly antagonizing the Soviets and giving them an external enemy to demonize. Of course, he was great for his pals in the weapons industry, what with his massive spending. Why is it Republicans venerate Reagan for doing the same things they accuse others of doing?
Oh, and he was a crap actor.
No thank you, besides he was a lousy actor too, only good at play-acting a president, never being one. His 2 terms started the downward spiral, where we're at today, the Greedy Me Years, the Greedy me wants more, the Greedy me Deserves more, the Greedy me Gets it all, and Greedy me have You pay for it all, Greedy me laughing all the way to the bank.
Why not? After all, I've seen a lot less deserving public figures displayed on stamps, statues and even money, while thinking to myself about the way our government wastes most of our tax dollars.
I remember Regan as being an outstanding performer in movies, a little on stage, sports, and as president.
Why not move US Grant to a new version of the much hated $2.00 bill, or a new $5.00 coin?
I hope never to see the faces of Clinton, (either one) Bush or Obama on any money. They have done more to devalue that money than any other current day figures.
As a matter of fact, due to the almost worthless value of the dollar, the $1,000.00 bill may make it back into general circulation, that would be a great place for old US Grant. On teh obverse side they obviously could put a fine electronicengraving of his tomb.
The joke where I live was once that the then President Marcos was asked if he wanted his likeness on money, and he refused since he's already gotten his hands on all of it.
Come to think of it, that is what has obviously happened in the US, the government has its personal hands on so much of our tax dollar, and no benefits to us the provider.
More proof Republicans can't think of anything useful to do w/ their time & OUR TAX MONEY! Please, people of North Carolina, vote Rep. Patrick McHenry out in November.
login to add your comment
use your care2 login
add your comment
20