A recently introduced bill in Congress has stirred controversy, calling for the addition of former President Donald Trump’s visage to the $100 bill. Some see it as a fitting tribute to a divisive figure, while others view it as a blatantly absurd political stunt. This bill is part of a disturbing trend in which U.S. currency is being used less and less as a tool for economic or historical representation and more as an instrument of political symbolism. The discussion also raises broader questions about the future of American currency, its values, and the growing impulse to politicize national symbols.
The Proposal to Put Trump’s Face on the $100 Bill: Here’s What You Need to Know
The idea of putting Donald Trump’s face on the $100 bill has ignited a storm of responses. Introduced in Congress by a group of Republican lawmakers, the bill would make a statement of praise for Mr. Trump, particularly his economic policies and his role in reshaping modern American politics. The $100 bill, long graced by the face of Benjamin Franklin, would undergo a dramatic change, with the controversial former president taking its place.
Why the $100 Bill?
One of the most commonly circulated forms of currency in the world, the $100 bill is a symbol of power. It represents the economic power of the United States and is often considered a beacon of prosperity, stability, and trust by the global community in the U.S. financial system. Benjamin Franklin has graced this bill for decades, an appropriate presence given his pivotal role in American history, from the founding of the country to his influence in shaping the nation’s financial systems. Replacing Franklin with any modern political figure, such as Donald Trump, would mark an unprecedented departure from tradition.
Proponents of the bill argue that Trump deserves recognition for his part in transforming America’s economy, including tax cuts and initiatives aimed at boosting the U.S. job market. Others view it as a way to memorialize a president who, despite controversy, made a lasting impact on history. However, the bill is facing stiff opposition from critics who argue that it politicizes American currency—a step they say could jeopardize its integrity and tarnish its reputation abroad.
The Absurd Trend: Making U.S. Currency Political
This bill is not an outlier. It is part of a broader trend of politicization of U.S. currency and other national symbols. Over the years, American politicians have used currency and national monuments as opportunities to pay homage to themselves, often raising questions about whether the focus is on history or on a more symbolic version of self-interest.
A Brief History of Political Leaders on U.S. Money
American currency has always served as a reflection of the nation’s values, history, and important figures. Traditionally, portraits on American bills have been reserved for individuals who played foundational roles in the country’s development. Presidents like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S. Grant, and Benjamin Franklin have had places on the currency because of their significant contributions to the nation.
There have been efforts to memorialize a broader spectrum of American figures—civil rights activists like Martin Luther King Jr., and political reformers like Harriet Tubman—but the idea of using a living or recently-deceased political figure on currency has never been broached. Not even presidents who have passed away, like Ronald Reagan, have made it to U.S. bills. This tradition of selecting individuals whose legacies transcend partisan lines has helped maintain U.S. money as apolitical.
Partisan Symbolism Is on the Rise
The Donald Trump proposal fits into a pattern of repurposing national institutions for political purposes. In 2016, during the administration of former President Barack Obama, a proposal was made to replace Andrew Jackson’s portrait on the $20 bill with an image of Harriet Tubman, a pivotal figure in the abolitionist movement. Although the plan faced controversy, it was a move toward honoring underrepresented figures in U.S. history. However, the proposal was delayed under the Trump administration, and it remains unclear if it will ever be realized.
The campaign to put Trump’s face on the $100 bill is also a reflection of the rising trend of politicizing currency. Critics argue that such actions are intended not as tributes to historical significance, but to weaponize currency as a tool of endorsement for a political figure. This use of money as a political instrument could set a dangerous precedent for the future of American currency.
The Economic and Global Ramifications
If politically motivated, the proposal to add Trump’s face on the $100 bill could have significant economic and global ramifications. The U.S. dollar is the world’s main reserve currency, and any changes to its design could affect the global perception of the U.S. and its financial stability.
The Symbolism of U.S. Currency
Money is not just a tool for financial transactions. It becomes a symbol of national unity, strength, and identity. The design of U.S. bills reflects a long-standing tradition, where the $100 note generally features a historical figure whose contributions have had an indelible mark on the nation in a way that many Americans, across the political spectrum, can appreciate. Replacing Benjamin Franklin with a contemporary political figure like Trump would diminish the universal trust and respect that Franklin enjoys, replacing it with a figure that carries significant political polarization.
U.S. currency is also intricately connected to the country’s credibility in the global financial system. For international investors, the U.S. dollar is considered a safe haven, and its design is integral to preserving that status. Introducing someone as divisive as Trump could create a perception of instability and undermine confidence in the neutrality of the dollar as a global reserve currency.
Impact on Global Markets
The U.S. dollar underpins the global financial system. It facilitates international trade, maintains foreign reserves, and plays a central role in global investment. Any alteration to the design of U.S. currency that seems politically motivated could have long-lasting impacts on global markets. This could signal political instability, prompting investors, governments, and businesses to trust the dollar less and diversify their foreign reserves.
Putting Donald Trump’s face on the $100 bill would be another symbol of the weaponization of the U.S. dollar’s global status. This could lead to a decline in the dollar’s use in global markets, with other currencies potentially being seen as a more neutral store of value.
Separation: A Nation Split by the Proposal
The proposal to put Trump’s face on the $100 bill reveals how deeply the political divide has grown in America. Proponents of the bill argue that Trump’s economic policies and his impact on American politics warrant such an honor. But critics contend that the proposal is an attempt to politicize money and deepen the nation’s already stark political divides.
Polls and Public Opinion
Views on the proposal are sharply divided. A recent Gallup poll showed that 60% of Americans are opposed to the idea of Trump’s face appearing on U.S. currency, compared to 35% who support the idea. However, among Republicans, the idea enjoys overwhelming support, with 75% in favor of the proposal. This extreme difference in belief highlights a larger divide in American politics, where symbols of nationhood are increasingly manipulated and harnessed to serve a political agenda.
National Identity and Currency
Money plays a vital role in determining the identity of a nation. It reflects the nation’s values, history, and collective memory. The call to put Trump’s face on the $100 note is not just about the design of currency; it is symbolic of the civil unrest currently raging in America. The currency that should be a unifying symbol of national pride is increasingly being used as a weapon for partisan purposes.
Conclusion: Time for Stability and Unity
The push to put Donald Trump’s face on the $100 bill is part of a broader, troubling effort to politicize national symbols. The $100 bill has long been considered a symbol of unity, trust, and historical significance in U.S. currency. Replacing Benjamin Franklin with a living political figure like Trump would not only trivialize these values, but it would also set a dangerous precedent for the future of American money.
Given the current climate of political polarization, it is crucial to preserve the sanctity of national symbols, such as currency. Money should continue to represent the common history and values of the American people—a unifying force, not a partisan weapon. For the sake of national unity and the integrity of U.S. currency, the idea of putting Trump’s face on the $100 bill should be discarded.
FAQs
1. Why is there a proposal to put Trump’s face on the $100 bill?
The proposal aims to pay tribute to Donald Trump’s record in the
