Women on 20s: Why target Jackson? Why the $20?

This entry is part 2 of 5 in the series Women on 20s
Pocahontas 20 dollar bill

Some advocate replacing Jackson with Pocahontas.

The Women-On-20s movement to dump Andrew Jackson from the $20 bill and replace him with a famous woman is gaining traction. But why is Jackson the target? Why not George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin, or any of the other men whose images adorn our paper currency?

The reason is political numerology.

The 19th Amendment, which granted women the right to vote, was ratified on August 18, 1920. This makes the year 2020 the 100th anniversary of the amendment. The year 2020 makes the $20 bill the perfect one to change.

So, the movement isn’t focused on getting rid of Old Hickory per se. WomenOn20s.org notes, however, that Jackson’s record might also be reason to remove him from the $20. As president, Jackson signed into law the Indian Removal Act that forcibly relocated Native Americans to western lands. Thousands of Cherokees died in what became known as the “Trail of Tears.” In his second annual address to Congress, he said, “It gives me pleasure to announce to Congress that the benevolent policy of the Government, steadily pursued for nearly thirty years, in relation to the removal of the Indians beyond the white settlements is approaching to a happy consummation.”

Yet another reason was his opposition to paper currency. He strongly favored gold and silver coins. So, the spirit of Old Hickory might rest easier knowing that, finally, Jackson no longer appeared on the paper currency he hated.

Do you agree that the 100th anniversary of the 19th amendment makes the $20 bill the perfect choice to change?
Does Jackson’s record also warrant removal of his visage?

Your vote counts! Cast your vote here for up to three of 15 candidates Women on 20s proposes as replacements for Jackson on the $20.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Series Navigation<< Women on 20s: Should a woman replace Jackson on the $20?Women on 20s: Should Hillary Clinton replace Andrew Jackson? >>
Comments: (1)
Categories: Uncategorized

Comments

  1. Rev. Bob Roth says

    Yes, Andrew Jackson, an architect of genocide, should have been off our currency long ago. His presence there aids the continual denial of a major part of our history and makes most of the world marvel at our lack of self-awareness. And of course we are long overdue to have one (and more than one) great woman from American history on our currency.