There’s been talk of replacing Andrew Jackson with Harriet Tubman on the $20 bill – the first woman on paper currency since Martha Washington in 1896. At first, I was so excited and proud to have an African American woman on a dollar bill. Then I found out the abolitionist would not be receiving her own bill, but sharing it with Indian killer Andrew Jackson. Tubman will be the front of the bill while Jackson gets the back. It was then I realized this wasn’t about honoring someone who embodied life and liberty, but a cheap ploy to make everyone happy.
Those on currency are supposed to exemplify America’s values, and we are meant to look to their legacies to see how we should live our lives, according to U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew.
“I have been particularly struck by the many comments and reactions from young and old for whom Harriet Tubman is not just a historical figure, but a role model for leadership and participation in our democracy," Lew wrote. "You shared your thoughts about her life and her works and how they changed our nation and represented our most cherished values.”
So why then do we allow Jackson to stay on the bill? What about his actions should we replicate and admire? Is it the made his fortune off of the backs of slaves? Was it how he masterminded genocide in the name of “progress?” Or was it his complete disregard for the political process that made him so honorable? If we choose not to ignore and sugar-coat history, we can see Jackson getting kicked off the bill has been a long time coming.
Tubman and Jackson led two completely different lives and to have the two side by side is senseless. The government wouldn’t put Hitler and a holocaust survivor on two sides of a coin, so why put a former slave next to a slave owner? Tubman did not conduct the Underground Railroad to share a bill with the orchestrator of the Trail of Tears. She did not escape slavery, return 19 times, and escort hundreds under the cover of night, to be associated with someone who slaughtered thousands in broad daylight. I believe she would rather not be on the bill at all than to share it with an oppressor, as it belittles all of her accomplishments.
Maybe I’m just being overly sensitive and maybe because of where we are in time, I should just be happy that a woman would be considered to be on a bill at all, but I cannot help but feel like this is an injustice. Symbols matter and regardless of who is on the bill, representation makes a difference, so let's depict the history we're proud of and not the incidents we sweep under the rug.
"Women and men are equal partners in our nation's success and our money should reflect that. Sure, it's only symbolic, but U.S. money is just about as powerful a symbol as there is in the world," Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez, who introduced the idea of putting a woman on the $20 bill.However, we’ll just have to wait and see, as decisions are still being made. This proposition sparked other ideas to put Susan B. Anthony, Lucretia Mott, Alice Paul, and other historical, influential women on the backs of dollar bills. They won’t be officially unveiled till 2020 – the hundredth anniversary of the Constitution’s 19th amendment, which gave women the right to vote. The unveiling date is fitting; now we have to make sure the people are fitting.
