It is not without some concern that as much as the 21st century is all about change, it is remarkable to look at the things that have stayed the same.
This is symbolized by our drab, green U.S. currency.
While none of the presidents who served in my lifetime are on our U.S. currency, (the most recent president is the early 20th century president Woodrow Wilson; the others are from the 19th century) we see these images every day. The $20 bill especially is our most used and most recognized currency. President Andrew Jackson replaced Grover Cleveland on the $20- in 1928, but has since been associated with negative images like his role in the westward expansion’s “Trail of Tears” and denouncement of early abolitionists.
Perhaps it is time for a change.
A recent bill introduced in Congress has called for a ‘woman on the twenty-dollar bill.’ The bill, if passed, would remove President Andrew Jackson’s image and replace him with the likes of Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks, Eleanor Roosevelt or Wilma Mankiller, the Cherokee Nation’s first female chief. It is a start and perhaps the controversial Andrew Jackson could and should be swapped out.
Some would say Eleanor Roosevelt did more good deeds in the White House than a few sitting presidents. Not to mention her work with the United Nations. Perhaps though, instead of a token gesture, what about replacing President Jackson’s image with the next female president, whenever that happens, because it will someday.
* * *
With the 2016 presidential election season beginning to take shape, it is interesting to look back and compare this political season to the year 1976. Although the idea of a woman president back then was off the table, there is a sense of history repeating itself this time around, this early in the game, as the pendulum swings.
That bicentennial year, the country was coming off a long stint of Republican leadership with four more years of Gerald Ford ahead if he won. It was a rallying point for Democrats. The field of Democratic candidates numbered no less than 15 and included George Wallace, Jerry Brown, Robert Carlyle Byrd, Lloyd Bentson, Sergeant Shriver, Henry Martin “Scoop” Jackson and a relative unknown named Jimmy Carter to name a few.
While the Republicans made the de facto move and backed Gerald Ford for another season, it was the crowded field of Democratic candidates that made that election season so interesting.
Like 1976, today, the Republicans have the crowded field of relative unknowns very much in the hunt. Will an unknown and untested Republican emerge victorious after 8 years of a Democrat in the White House?
Looking back at the roster of 1976, it is amazing to see names like conservatives George Wallace and Scoop Jackson on the same ticket as that ‘Californian hippy’ Jerry Brown, as he was called then. Ideologically and vastly different in their politics, many of the candidates in 1976 went on to have careers in the Senate or like Brown, are in the Governor’s house in California today. There is no doubt that the Republicans on the ballot today are coming at it from different points of view.
I never imagined that in 2015 religion would be such a rallying cry and it makes me wonder.
Whereas in 1976, the most devout Baptist among the candidates became our President, religion was always a part of Carter’s persona but not his politics. It is far more common today for political candidates to carry their religious beliefs around like a torch, not a private matter.
With so many unknowns, should we seriously ask whether we have the same caliber of people running for president today as we did in 1976? Look at the then/now and compare.
One candidate, Skip Andrews, declares in his first paragraph that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Check.
Ted Cruz is described as the most prominent member of the ‘intellectual spine’ of the Tea Party movement. OK, check.
Marco Rubio has made the bold statement that there is no responsible way to use marijuana recreationally. Yep.
Mike Huckabee said this week that America is ‘moving rapidly towards the criminalization of Christianity.’ Really?
It is interesting to look back at 1976 and wonder what Lloyd Bentsen or Jerry Brown might say about marijuana, same sex marriage, Christmas music and tea. I feel or hope at that time they would say, “what does this have to do with being qualified to lead?”
If the candidates measure up to the impressive men who ran in 1976, we owe them our consideration. If they are basing their campaign on ideology, fear tactics and are being paid by the Koch brothers, I for one cannot abide it. I want to hear engaging political conversation from savvy people – and not hear a presidential hopeful declare that if he wins the election and becomes my President he will ban lifestyles and replace it with religion.
I need more. I think the country deserves more.
What is truly different from 1976, and what may not pass this way again soon, is that we, as a country, are poised to elect the first woman president in history. We are in for something brand new and in my opinion, something good.
This is not 1976 – and if you look at the list of most of the men running on the Republican ticket, I can say with some confidence that the most intelligent and capable person to run this country right now may be a woman. She may not be everyone’s cup of tea but she is a person who has been -more than- vetted and can take the helm of this country right now and keep it steady.
New Hampshire is already hosting visits by candidates who are digging into pancakes at the local diners. We are well underway. So it begins. Like 1976, we have untested, unknown men on one side in a crowded field. Unlike any other time in our history we have a powerful, smart woman who has the “courage to compete”. And whose win could make history.
We have a long debate season to go.
I for one would like to stand at my ATM machine someday and see a $20 bill pop out with a female face. I confess this time around I am probably going to put my money on her.