Within the past few years, the United States Department of the Treasury made the decision to begin a major redesign of U.S. currency. They have begun their redesign process with the $10 note, stating that the new bill will include the portrait of a woman for the first time since 1896, when Martha Washington was featured on the $1 Silver Certificate.
Following the announcement, the Treasury launched a social media campaign, asking Americans to use the hashtag #TheNew10 to weigh in on who they should put on the bill.
The question that needs to be answered: is the $10 note the best place to start with the redesign?
Amidst the social media conversation the question arose of why the U.S. Treasury decided to redesign the $10 note, picturing Alexander Hamilton, instead of the $20 note, picturing Andrew Jackson. Several Twitter users asked the U.S. Treasury to keep Hamilton because of his position as the first Secretary of the Treasury for the United States, and replace Jackson instead.


To completely understand the debate we need to make a decision on what it means to be placed on U.S. currency. Margaret Rhee, assistant professor in the University of Oregon women’s and gender studies department, believes money means more to the American people than just its dollar value.
“Money itself and the tangibleness of it can been seen as media,” said Rhee.
There hasn’t been much concern about who is depicted on our paper money until recently. We should be thinking about what kind of messages this medium is communicating.
UO history professor Steve Beda sees money as a link to the past. “In part, money is creating a shared history,” Beda said.
We deal with money on a daily basis, only paying attention to the number in the corner. But it is also a way to express history. We need to decide who we want to be a part of our shared history.
Despite Andrew Jackson’s role in modernizing democracy, he is also known for his hand in Native American removal. If money is set up to honor the people we place on the bills, then Andrew Jackson should not be depicted at all. We should not be honoring what he did in regard to Native American removal.
“I don’t think Jackson should be a part of that shared history, because that means if you are Cherokee, you are not part of that shared history,” said Beda.
The shared history should represent everyone, not simply the elite (i.e., presidents or powerful white men). We should be asking the figures currently on our money represent our nation as a whole. This conversation puts into perspective the importance of knowing our history and who we choose to represent that history.
Our nation has been full of great leaders who were not in the highest positions of power but deserve to be celebrated. Whichever woman they decide to honor doesn’t need to be someone who was high up on the political food chain, but someone who made herself known by actively trying to do good for our country.
Jackson should be the first to go, not Hamilton. So #TheNew10 should be #TheNew20. Not to say that the $10 bill doesn’t deserve a face lift, but with Jackson’s history, the $20 note is a more pressing matter.