Are Coins Real Change?

Adding women to U.S. currency brings up questions of the action’s performative nature.

A new initiative, titled the American Women Quarters Program, was recently put in place by the U.S. government, just in the past month. These new quarters feature a new visage of George Washington, originally designed by Laura Gardin Fraser in 1932. The tails side of the coins will each include a likeness of five different influential American women; Maya Angelou, Dr. Sally Ride, Wilma Mankiller, Nina Otero-Warren, and Anna May Wong, and will go into circulation in 2022, beginning with Maya Angelou, and continuing through 2025. This act was first authorized by the Circulating Collectible Coin Redesign Act of 2020 (Public Law 116-330), which was introduced to congress by Rep. Barbara Lee. While the implementation of this program has been met with praise, it’s also been met with criticism and claims of it being a performative gesture. The question we should be asking is: why are we implementing this collectible coin program instead of making real change to improve the lives of those who these women represent?

The performativity of this act is hard to ignore. While commemorating the efforts of those who have been overlooked is always a good thing, it doesn’t add up to social improvements or significant change. Women still earn 76 cents to every dollar earned by a man, and the pay gap for the very women of color on the majority of the coins is even higher. It seems rather shallow for women’s likenesses to be deposited on a coin, when that same economic system still treats them unequally. Additionally, this law was introduced a week before Trump left office, meaning that it would be one of the first bills on Biden’s desk. This program, on the surface, seems like a good thing, and it boosts Biden’s image. While the motives behind the law appear genuine, the timing does seem somewhat coincidental.

The American Women Quarters Program is supposed to promote the importance of equal gender representation, but the women are still not equally portrayed on the coin; they are on the tails side, and will not be permanent residents on our quarters. This is not equal representation, this is women, once again, taking a back seat to men.

While the program will feature five American women, Maya Angelou’s quarter is the first to be released, and therefore, has become the most talked about. The biggest question regarding her appearance on the coin is, would Maya Angelou want to be on the quarter in the first place? The official Maya Angelou website displays nothing but excitement towards the initiative. This enthusiasm contrasts with many of her works, which don’t exactly portray a pro-capitalist stance. U.S. currency is a complete representation of capitalism, so many are questioning whether the choice of Ms. Angelou disregards the messages that she shared in her works.

When thinking of recent changes to our currency, one of the first things that comes to mind is the effort to replace Andrew Jackson with Harriet Tubman on the $20 bill. This failed proposal brings up the concept of whether or not we should be taking problematic figures off of our currency. If we choose to remove problematic figures, deciding who to take off becomes difficult. When analyzing people within the context of our current time, every person on our currency has committed acts or taken positions that are horrific by our modern standards. How do we decide who to take off and who to keep on? Removing problematic figures from our currency is a good effort to recognize that no matter their historical contributions, they have had a negative and harmful impact.

There is also a question as to whether or not the women we are putting on our currency as a part of the American Women Quarters Program should even be the choices to put on our coins. We really have to analyze what our physical currency as a whole represents. If the coin represents what we value, uphold, and honor, then these women are the perfect individuals to appear on our currency. But if those coins represent a capitalist system built on slave labor, then maybe the established residents on our currency should stay there. The real issue is that there is currently a mix of the two, and we need to decide who we want to represent us, and what we want our currency to portray.

What is the true value of the American Women Quarters Program? In the grand scheme of things, putting a few women on the backs of a few quarters has very little significance. Equal pay, reproductive rights, and sexual assault of women continues to be overlooked, while inscribing five women on a chunk of metal is what our leaders have chosen to devote their efforts to.