78 thoughts on “Blog 82 – Replace Andrew Jackson on the $20?”

1. Josh Klein January 20, 2016 at 8:10 pm

   After reading “Rethinking History” and contemplating the issues of today’s society, I believe that Andrew Jackson should remain on the $20 bill. It is clear that Jackson and other major political and historical figures may have broken moral codes that we embed in our brain to embark by. However, I am not attempting to defend their actions, but these men lived in a different time period. Slavery wasn’t okay back then, but it was a major part of their society. It is hard to compare the way their lives played out 250 plus years ago compared to ours in a community that is still struggling to conform to being politically correct. Issues similar to this one can be looked at from multiple angles. I find that when someone accomplishes so many great feats at the most powerful role in the United States, they are tended to be overlooked by historians. Those who study these great men tend to focus on the moments where the messed up. I also believe that Jackson should remain on the $20 bill, because how would removing him solve anything? The only way to fix something is to learn from your mistakes. If his faced was removed from currency, that would only be teaching kids that an issue can be solved by avoiding it. We need to remember slavery and the mistreatment of Native Americans so that in the future, we never see the harsh and cruel treatment of any group of people. Although some my find Andrew Jackson’s place on the $20 bill as offensive we as a united country need to remember that we aren’t celebrating his harsh demeanor, but instead his accomplishments and the lesson we are to be taught; do not let this time in history repeat itself.
2. Ro Arambula January 20, 2016 at 8:45 pm

   Based on the three options you gave for Jackson on the $20 bill, I really like suggestions one and three which entail leaving him on the bill unchanged, and leaving him on the bill but educating people about who he was. Preferably, I think leaving him on the bill without giving knowledge is the way to go, and I have a few reasons for this. The first reason is that I am scared of change, and do not see the need in change unless there is a dramatic need for something new to be done. Jackson has been on the twenty for over a hundred years, and while although now is a time in which this stirs up controversy, there is not enough reason to change the currency. The slippery slope idea is one I choose to follow with this decision. All over our country, and world, there is evidence in names, pictures and other things that represent a bad past. The Washington Redskins for example may insult group of people, but that doesn’t mean you should destroy a very prestigious franchise. There is also no need for a change because the general public, in my opinion, is not educated to a point to know about Jackson, and they might not even care. I think that if there was enough concerned people or if certain representatives felt like the general public would care to know, then it would be important to educate them on the topic, but I still do not think that he should be taken off. Especially in this day and age where most people have cards and get payed by a check or there is no paper involved anyway. In conclusion, because people do not know, probably will not care, and don’t pay attention to the cash other than the amount its worth, I think it would be an unnecessary hassle to try and say,” you cant use these twenty anymore, instead you have to use these.”
3. Dan Llope January 21, 2016 at 3:47 pm

   This is a re-do of my previous entry. My proposal on the issue is that we go on solution #3. I say keep Jackson on the 20- for a few reasons. One being that he needs to be a reminder of what can happen to this country if we let an arrogant bigot take the wheel. History repeats itself, yes? If nobody remembers how inaugurating Andrew Jackson as the POTUS led to the removal of an ethnic group, the country is likely to choose somebody like Donald Trump or Ted Cruz. An entire ethnicity was removed when Jackson was removed. Two (or more) ethnic groups will be targeted for removal if we let history run its course as Trump or Cruz or anyone else like them become president. Removing a president from a form of currency would be like the Federal Reserve just doing a large-scale Tattoo removal on currency. Painful and Scarring. Another being that Jackson also did good things in his presidency (trying to help out westerners with issues with the 2nd BUS)- the blunder doesn’t have to be overlooked, but the good things that he did in life also need to be looked upon. Hell, even Nixon did good things. If one can overlook the Watergate scandal, one can see the fact that he brought our boys home from Vietnam. Taking Jackson off the 20 is near pointless, as I see it. I don’t want to come off as cold, but that’s how i feel.
4. Allison Miller January 21, 2016 at 5:31 pm

   This argument about keeping Andrew Jackson on the 20-dollar bill versus removing him and replacing him with someone with a less offensive past is certainly not a new one. This issue was discussed at length in my 8th grade American history class, and although I can’t remember which way I finally sided I do remember much dispute and disagreement on the issue. In my eyes, there isn’t an exact and clear way to deal with this issue. Andrew Jackson was a man who changed America for both better and for worse. He was the first president to come from the common people, which helped us to set ourselves and our government apart from the rest of the world. Jackson was the founder of the Democratic party, which interestingly enough is currently being led by presidential candidate Hilary Clinton to fight to remove him from the $20 and replace him with Harriet Tubman. To continue on his good deeds; Andrew Jackson is who we have to thank for universal white male suffrage. Although by today’s standards allowing all white male citizens (but only that group) to vote seems miniscule, it was an important step in our nation’s journey towards widespread equality and justice. On the other hand, Andrew Jackson is the sole reason the Trail of Tears ever had to happen. With the bill of the Indian Removal Act of 1830 Jackson was able to negotiate treaties with the “Five Civilized Tribes” east of the Mississippi to move them from their native lands and herd them into unknown territory. This “agreement” (more like force overuse of federal power) was the start of the Trail of Tears: a series of forced relocations. In conclusion I support the removal of Andrew Jackson from the $20 bill because he caused more harm than positive growth in our nation in his terms as President when he represented the entire nation.
5. Sean Bonner January 21, 2016 at 7:01 pm

   Seventh President Andrew Jackson has been on the twenty dollar bill since 1928; almost 100 years. Some people wish to change that. The idea of portraying the “common man” U.S. president as an American hero is an idea of great controversy. He was a hot-tempered man who rampaged through Florida, harassing the Spanish and the Seminole Indians. He was responsible for denying the Supreme Court’s ruling of letting the Cherokee live on their land. He was also a war hero, though, who won the vast majority of the nation’s heart. Despite Jackson’s negative acts on the country, I believe that his face shouldn’t be removed from the 20 dollar bill. Instead, we should make it a priority to educate the nation on his errors, and use that education to better America as a whole.
   Yes, Jackson was a slaveholder who destroyed the BUS, owned many slaves, and was the head decision in follow-through of pushing the Native Americans westward off their lands. If we remove Jackson from the 20, though, what does that accomplish? George Washington also owned many slaves, around 100, but we do not even think about removing our first President off of the one-dollar bill. Abraham Lincoln, despite seeing slavery as morally wrong, didn’t think blacks as having equal rights, and even argued against black voting rights in an 1858 debate for U.S. Senate. Should he be removed too? The point is this: We do not learn anything from removing a face off of a piece of currency. We learn by admitting to our people that our nation and Founding Fathers weren’t perfect, and that they suffered countless mistakes. That realization in itself is what separates America from nations like China or North Korea, where their governments hide all of their past mistakes from the general public and their education. Keeping a famous war hero on the 20 who also had his share of mistakes while teaching our society about these mistakes is the best option when concerning this issue.
6. Isabella Levitt January 21, 2016 at 7:49 pm

   Out of all the options given regarding the fate of the $20 bill, I can see clear arguments for each option. Personally, maybe there is a bias here as a woman myself, I like the idea of putting the face of a woman of great power on some form of currency. It is about time that something came around with the face of a woman on it, and it seems reasonable to replace Andrew Jackson with one of these women. Andrew Jackson’s actions are just as easily learned about in history classes as any other political figure in history not one a sort of currency. Not only are there no women honored on the face of currency, there are also no people of color represented either. In this aspect, this makes someone like Rosa Parks or Harriet Tubman an ideal choice. This would bring two new images to currency, ones that are so important in our society today. There is still a fight for equality with people of color and women, so it could be one step closer to making it feel anything near equal. This is not to say that we should go crazy, removing anyone and everything that ever had anything to do with slavery from the face of our country. That would be near impossible, with the history we have as a nation. Andrew Jackson’s history is especially filled with situations that worked against minorities, so if we were going to remove anyone from currency, it would be best to be him. Though Lincoln and Washington, who are obviously both on currency too, also were apart of the slavery culture in one way or another, it is significantly less apart of their history. When in class, we didn’t spent a lot of time talking about the relation that each of those two had to slavery or racism, while we did spend a fair amount of time focusing on Andrew Jackson and racism.
7. David Kent January 21, 2016 at 8:23 pm

   The way I see it, people will never be able to come to terms on whether Andrew Jackson should have the honor of being on the $20 dollar bill. His legacy is interpreted multiple ways; some praise him as a common man who embodied the American Dream by becoming president and others see him as a tyrannical Indian murderer. However, Jackson is not the only controversial figure on our bills. Everyone, from Washington to Franklin, has some dark spots in their background, and this is just how life is. I will admit that Jackson could arguably be called the most controversial, but still achieved things in office and in his life that are remarkable. I believe that Jackson does deserve to be printed on our bills because he earned the right. However, I have two conditions to this. The first is that people must be educated on his history and why he is on our money. It is important to learn about the pros and the cons – that’s what makes history so important. You can look at what he did right and strive to follow in his footsteps, and at the same time you can see what he did wrong and make sure history doesn’t repeat itself in that instance. In fact, I think having Jackson on a bill puts him in the spotlight, and it urges people to learn more about his history and why people are having such a fuss about him being on the $20 bill. Now, my second condition is based off some personal preference, but is historical backed nonetheless. I believe Jackson belongs on a bill; just not the $20 dollar bill. Replacing him with another figure could satisfy both sides of the agreement. If you put him on a less-circulated bill, his prominence would be lessened without taking him completely out of the picture. Now, the only question is where to put him. I would propose to switch Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson, with Jackson on the $2 dollar bill and Jefferson on the $20. This would keep Jackson’s face from showing up as often (since the $2 bill is basically a collector’s item) without taking him out of circulation completely. Of course, Jefferson is in no way, shape, or form not controversial, but he did so much for our country without putting into action the removal of the Cherokee Indians off their lands. I argue that he did much more for this country than to be put on the collectable that is the $2 bill. Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, America’s most prized document behind the Constitution, as well as founded the University of Virginia. He was America’s first Secretary of State, the second vice president, and was elected himself as the third president. He made the Louisiana Purchase, ordered an end to the pirating going on around Tripoli, and helped shape the Democratic – Republican Party (later turning into the Democratic Party). Now, Jefferson did put the hated Embargo of 1807 in place and he did own slaves, but once again these are the dark spots on the history of a human being. Nobody, not even George Washington nor Beyoncé, was/is prefect, and it is through our errors and the errors of others that we learn and grow. This is why the figure of Jackson should stay in circulation, just not on the everyday-used $20 bill. My main man Jefferson deserves that honor, for reals home skillet.
8. Giovanni R January 21, 2016 at 8:25 pm

   Why Andrew Jackson is on the 20 dollar bill has puzzled me since I learned about his racist and ignorant past. The fact that we idolize a person that ignored fillings from the Supreme Court, became famous by killing thousands of English weeks after the war of 1812 was over, played a key role in kicking tens of thousands of Native People from their land, and thought that being uneducated was a good quality in a president is crazy. I think that removing Andrew Jackson from the 20 is a good idea. This isn’t as big of a change as many think in 1914 president Grover Cleveland was on the front of the 20 dollar bill but it was later changed to the Jackson we hate today. However I also believe that we need to educate the public on the racism and discrimination in our nations history. With out the knowledge of it in our past how are we able to see racism in the present day. While we have come a long way from the 1800s slave filled South we still face racial issues today, there are people that are being blatantly racist and are considered geniuses by their followers. This is what comes from the lack of education on the racist ideas of the past allows people to see the ideas of someone like Donald Trump’s, as new ideas to did America and not thrust it back into the darkness of its past. In order to make our society a more forward thinking one we must not only remove Jackson from his place on the 20, but also inform our people so we don’t make the same mistakes that are now seen as the more uncomfortable and depressing topics of US history.
9. Chance Stephenson January 21, 2016 at 9:37 pm

   Andrew Jackson is one of the most controversial presidents in American history. But Andrew Jackson isn’t really the problem, we’re the problem. Society as a collective has many problems. There are faces of the past, and we cannot change the past. We need to learn to accept what happened and move on to create a better future. However, there is a fine line between remembering and accepting the past and glorifying it. I believe that we, as a society, should learn about the horrors of the past, so we can avoid those pitfalls in the future. However, many historical figures are awful and do not deserve glory of any kind. There are many times in history were awful crimes against human decency, however it should still be remembered, and should never happen again. Andrew Jackson is difficult do deal with. Andrew Jackson’s legacy should be remembered, as should he be celebrated for his political accomplishments. However, Andrew Jackson should not be on the $20 bill because he actually offends many groups, he himself despised paper money, and we should put a different person on the $20 bill.
   Andrew Jackson shouldn’t be on our currency because he is very offending to many people. Jackson is infamous for his ethnic cleansing of the native Americans. Having Jackson on our currency signifies that we condone his actions and support the bigotry and racism that he represented. As the article mentioned, this is a slippery slope. Washington owned slaves, as did most of the founding fathers. The exception here is Jackson initiated legislation that ended up actually killing and forever degrading that one race. America today is ashamed of Jackson and his actions. We should take Jackson off the 20 because his mere presence signifies that some people are inferior to others, which goes against the ideals of the country we want to live in today.
   Andrew Jackson also hated the idea of paper money. If the purpose of putting Jackson on the bill in the first place is to honor him, then we made a serious mistake. If Jackson were to see the way we are honoring him, he would be very disappointed in us as a whole. He would much rather a monument or something in his home state of Tennessee, and he would be offended to be placed on the very currency he worked so hard to destroy. Jackson also shot and killed anywhere from 13 to 120 people in duels, according to various historians. While this is not something that offends a certain group, it is not the image we as a country want to portray.
   Finally, so many other people deserve to be on US currency. How about Franklin D. Roosevelt? His political initiatives helped America bounce back from the Great Depression. How about Teddy Roosevelt? He is loved by all and helped create the national parks? How about President Obama? A little bit of cultural diversity would be nice, and he did hunt down the man who took many innocent American lives on 9/11. Above all, many feminist groups are trying to get a female on US currency. A woman is expected to be on the $10 bill in 2020, in memory of the 9th amendment, which gave women the right to vote. However, Hamilton should be on the $10 bill, as he kind of created the idea of a federal bank. Many groups are arguing for Jackson to be removed and replaced with a woman, a sign of America’s growing diversity.
10. Skye Taylor January 22, 2016 at 8:39 am

    After all that we have learned about Andrew Jackson I think we should remove him from the twenty dollar bill and replace him with a woman of historical significance. Even if he were to be removed from the $20 dollar bill I believe that people should still be informed on the terrors of what he did. Andrew Jackson was horrible to the Indians and was a slave owner. I don’t think leaving him on the twenty without informing people about what he did would do anybody any justice. In the “Rethinking History” article it says that we don’t want to erase history so by removing Andrew Jackson and informing people on what he did would not erase history. I am not saying everything that Jackson did was awful, but there are just plenty of other people that could be put on the twenty. For example, Harriet Tubman could be one of the many options. Harriet Tubman was a slave who escaped successfully and came back risking her own freedom to help other slaves become free as well. This would make the currency more diverse by having Harriet on the twenty would give America the chance to actually recognize someone else besides just another dead, white,president they would be recognizing a former black slave. This wouldn’t help with just race it would be a wonderful change because she is a women and the only woman to ever be on American currency is Sacajawea. I think it might also be offensive to people who are Native American to see Andrew Jackson on the bill because they know the history of how he slaughtered their ancestors and drove them off their land.
11. Paige Stearn January 22, 2016 at 2:06 pm

    I believe that Andrew Jackson should be taken off of the twenty-dollar bill for many reasons. First, he owned slaves. This is one of the worst issues that ever came about in American history. Slaveowners treated African Americans like property. They had absolutely no rights because of people like Jackson. America should not be portrayed by a person that would mistreat human beings in this way. Second, he was far too involved with the “Indian Removal Act.” This act was placed to remove all Native Americans from the land west of the Mississippi River in order to keep America “safe.” The “Indian Removal Act” was enacted during Jackson’s presidency. The fact that he allowed Congress to get away with “moving” an entire population away from their homes is just another reason why he should not be on the American twenty-dollar bill. Another reason why Andrew Jackson should be removed from the twenty-dollar bill is because although he was considered a war hero, he killed men in duels for no apparent reason. He dueled people for idiotic reasons such as when people called him names. One man was mocking Jackson in a newspaper, so what did Jackson do? He challenged him to a duel and killed him. Why should a man who killed people for fun, discriminated against certain cultures, and enslaved African Americans be known as a man associated with America and our twenty-dollar bill? We should not reward him for the negative influences he has had on our country. Although we shall continue to learn about Andrew Jackson and his mishaps in our history classes to avoid recreating his mistakes.
12. Jackson Mahle January 23, 2016 at 12:32 pm

    I’m my opinion we should move Jackson from the 20 dollar bill to the 2 dollar bill. We should do this because while he made mistakes he was also made history and he was a great man. One of example of how Jackson made history was that he was the first president to come from a poorer background and he also did attend college, but that obviously didn’t affect him because he grew up to be an army general and one of the first presidents of the U.S. He was a great man because he, improved trade with Europe and South American countries, he made it possible for the common white man to be president. Jackson also had a bad side. He was a president that was more concerned with himself than the people around him. As a president he cared only about his decisions and laws, he didn’t care about the other two branches of government and he didn’t enforce laws that he didn’t believe in. He also started the so called “Trail of Tears” on which 1000s of Native Americans died. When the supreme court passed the law saying that the Native Americans could stay in the land just outside of Georgia’s territory, he cheered on the Georgians to go and take what was “rightfully theirs”. Jackson as a president had his ups and downs, he did good things and bad things. He definitely doesn’t deserve no to by on a dollar bill, but not the 20 This is why I believe that he should be moved to the two dollar bill. By Jackson Mahle
13. Michael Homer January 23, 2016 at 2:34 pm

    I personally believe that Andrew Jackson should remain on the twenty dollar bill for a couple of reasons. Yes it is extremely obvious that he had done cruel and terrible things, but he lived in a different time. I’m not defending him saying that back than slavery was okay I’m just saying that in that time it was being used by a ton of white males, whereas now we would see it as a disgrace than it was a part of their life style. Another reason why I believe Jackson should stay on the twenty dollar bill is because the removal of him would cause chaos and arguments. As a Nation we have taken our history and grown upon it, taking Jackson off the twenty dollar bill would be like saying let’s forget about this part in history because what we did was wrong. We should be using our history to make us better and stronger as a nation not to cause controversy about what happened many years ago. By taking him off it is teaching the future citizens of the nation to forget about the past if something bad happens, when they should use those bad incidents to prosper and succeed. Even though some people may view Andrew Jackson’s place on the twenty dolar bill as offensive and harmful to this nation, we need to bear in mind that we aren’t celebrating the bad things Jackson has done we are praising him for his good deeds as a president.
14. Lizzie Kompus January 23, 2016 at 4:15 pm

    From everything that I have read, researched and learned in class I do not believe that Andrew Jackson should stay on the $20 bill. Andrew Jackson is a very controversial person for multiple reasons, he’s considered an American war hero and one of the greatest presidents of all time however, he has done so many injustices. Andrew Jackson is one of the main causes for removing the Native Americans from their ancestral land. In the court case Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, Georgia had no right to claim the Cherokees land but they did anyways and Jackson did nothing to stop them. He was also in charge of shutting down the BUS, which caused many wildcat bands to become unreliable and this made economic issues for Western states. Jackson was also known for making impulsive decisions, having a quick temper and like many white males back in that time, a slave owner. I think that educating people about who Andrew Jackson was is great and should continue, but would make no progress for change. Keeping him on the bill and educating people about his faults would only cause more anger, because priding all of his actions can be insulting to many ethnic groups. I think that having your face on a bill is a privilege and somebody who has only made positive actions deserves that reward. In my opinion we should have a strong female figure like Harriet Tubman or Rosa Parks, who fought for black rights in a time where it was not socially acceptable, would be amazing candidates for a new face on the $20 bill.
15. Yuval K. January 23, 2016 at 4:51 pm

    At first I thought that Andrew Jackson should be removed from the $20 bill because of all the harm that he has done before and during his presidency. But after reading the article, I changed my mind. I changed my mind for a few reasons. One is remember that slavery was very popular in the US during that time period. Many people owned slaves, including Andrew Jackson, including many other presidents. People grew up with slaves, especially in the south, and because of that, when kids became adults, they got their own slaves. I don’t think that President Jackson should be taken off the $20 bill because of the many other presidents, like Washington, who had slaves and are on bills aren’t being taken off. The second reason that I believe why Jackson shouldn’t be taken off the bill is because although he has done much harm to the Indians, he wanted to help the expansion of the whites. I’m not trying to defend Jackson in forcing the Native Americans to move westwards, because this was a horrible thing. He wanted to make America greater, and more populous. The third reason why I believe that Jackson should not be taken off the bill is because he was a common man, he was became president as a common man. When Jackson lost to John Quincy Adams, Jackson supporters were not happy about this, they wanted to choose the president. Jackson’s supporters are the ones who helped get the people to vote for the president, and not having the higher class or the House decide who the next president is. Though, I do believe that a woman should be on a bill. I believe that instead of replacing someone on a bill, there should be a new bill with a woman on it, a woman who really inspired and changed the US.
16. Jackie Sullivan January 23, 2016 at 4:52 pm

    I agree with option number two, to change out Andrew Jackson’s face on the $20 bill and replace him with a woman of historical significance like Harriet Tubman. Although Andrew Jackson did some good things for our country like paying off the entire national debt, helped create the Democratic Party, and other things, the bad things defiantly outweighed the good. Some terrible things he did were passing the Indian Removal Act and owning slaves. The Indian Removal Act removed Native Americans east of the Mississippi River to made them go to lands west. This act is absolutely disgusting because gave the power to Andrew Jackson, a racist white man, to move another race out of the way so the white people could take their land. It makes it worse that Jackson told them before the act that one-day Native American people would be equal to white people. The Indian Removal Act was racist and unnecessary because the white people could have just shared the land with the Native Americans instead of taking it from them. Jackson also owned slaves throughout his life. There is no excuse for enslaving another race because you think you are superior to them. These are just a few reasons that Andrew Jackson’s face should be removed from the $20 bill. Having your face on American currency is an honor that Andrew Jackson dose not deserve. Instead, Harriet Tubman’s face should be on the $20 bill. Instead of owning slaves like Andrew Jackson, Harriet Tubman helped over 300 slaves to freedom. One who freed so many slaves deserves more than having their face on American currency.
17. Dahvi Lupovitch January 23, 2016 at 7:46 pm

    When thinking about Andrew Jackson I do agree that no one has ever been perfect and he should not be removed from the 20-dollar bill because of that. However, it is important for classrooms everywhere to discuss the error of his ways and make sure students understand that while he did have many flaws throughout his presidency, such as vetoing the charter of the bank of the United States or the Indian Removal Act, both of which were bad decisions on his part, the man was not all bad. He was a common man, or a man of the people, which is the reason he got elected in the first place. However, do not get the wrong idea, personally I am not a supporter of Jackson as a person, despite the good things he has done during his presidency.
    However: the question was whether or not I think that someone else deserves the spot on the 20-dollar bill. And to that my answer is yes. I am a firm believe that Harriet Tubman, or any strong independent woman should be on American currency. So many women throughout American history have done such amazing things. Equality between men and women are still a huge problem today. Why do extraordinary men get their photos on money and women do not? Why has the thought of putting a woman on a bill just recently come up in the first place? To me, it is not important who is replaced, whether it be Andrew Jackson or not. Harriet Tubman deserves to be on the 20-dollar bill as much as any man.
18. Courtney D January 23, 2016 at 7:51 pm

    I think that Jackson should be left on the bill but people should be educated about him and his history. Disclaimer: I am by no means in support of the bad things that Jackson did before and during his presidency. I think that Andrew Jackson made many controversial decisions in his presidency including vetoing the recharter of the Second Bank of the United States and deciding to move the Cherokee tribe out of their native lands onto the Trail of Tears. When people hear the name Andrew Jackson and actually know who he is, they think of the fact that he is on the $20 bill and they think of the Trail of Tears. Few of the good aspects of Jackson’s accomplishments come to light. For example, Jackson was a revered war hero in the War of 1812—though some don’t like the fact that he destroyed the British in the Battle of New Orleans almost two weeks after the war ended. Some of these people either do not know or neglect to mention that neither Jackson nor the British troops he was fighting had received the news of the end of the war when this battle took place. I think that whenever people bring this point up in an argument against Jackson they should know that it took two months for the news of the treaty to make its way across the Atlantic and the British were not defenseless; they were highly skilled and disciplined men. This is the very reason that people need to be educated when they try to present a claim about something, especially about something as controversial as this subject. Whether or not Jackson is to be taken off of the $20 dollar bill, people in the United States should be educated about him and his effect on our country.
19. Connor Bradbury January 23, 2016 at 9:46 pm

    Personally, I think we should remove Andrew Jackson from the $20 bill. His history of mistreating the Indians, the bringing down of the BUS, his ownership of slaves, and the way he tended to jump the gun when it came to conflicts were his worst aspects. Even though he was a very popular president given the fact that he grew up in the West, and that he identified with much of the common people, his flaws outweighed his successes. I think the Trail of Tears was his biggest mistake. The killing of thousands of Indians was a genocide, as they were forced to march west without proper protection and supplies without a second thought from Jackson. They were wrongly seen as less than human, and Georgia saw the land they had previously occupied as theirs, not the Indians’. I also think his action of destroying the BUS was a mistake as well. I think the BUS provided some organization to the land speculation out west, and that the National Bank giving out loans to the smaller western banks is better than having a free-for-all, with all banks trying to get money to lend to speculators. The fact that the Panic of 1819 was caused by the sudden demands of repayment by the BUS didn’t give enough reason to veto its renewal. The BUS tried to slow down over speculation of the west, which caused much resentment from westerners, Jackson included. Jackson’s support for one of the biggest issues in American history was also one of his biggest flaws that could be used to argue against his being on a national bank note. Slavery was one of the biggest blemishes on the history of the United States, and many presidents supported the slave trade. Even though our first president, Washington, owned slaves himself, he went so far as to emancipate them in his will when he died. Jackson owned 150 slaves by the time he died, and the Jackson family relied on them for all of the labor done on his plantation, The Hermitage. Lastly, his actions as a general before his presidency were another one of his downfalls. After the War of 1812 had ended with the Treaty of Ghent, Jackson invaded Spanish Florida. He hadn’t received word that the war had ended, but he had not been given permission to do so. His capture of Mobile, St. Marks, and Pensacola were technically illegal, and should have been dealt with by giving Jackson serious repercussions. Luckily, Spain didn’t react by declaring war, and even ceded Florida to the U.S. in the Adams-Onis Treaty of 1819. I think his aggressive attitude is one that shouldn’t be elected to be president, and certainly shouldn’t be rewarded by being on the $20 bill. I think, instead, we should replace him with Martin Luther King Jr. MLK was one of the most influential and important figures in American history, especially in racial history. He was the leading man in the Civil Rights Movement in the mid twentieth century, and made the biggest impact in racial equality. He inspired millions of people to join his cause for equality, and set the foundation for further equality for women, and those of homosexuality and bisexuality, naming just a few reforms that happened after the Civil Rights Movement. I think MLK had a much more positive effect on American society than Andrew Jackson, as he brought equality for a whole race, and opened the eyes of the whole world to the injustices of segregation and inequality. I think that if Andrew Jackson were to be taken of the $20, MLK should be one of the first people on the list of replacements. We’ve broken the barrier of having an African American president; why can’t we break the barrier of only having white men being the face of the United States monetary system?
20. Victoria Auten January 23, 2016 at 11:25 pm

    With the combination of my knowledge on Andrew Jackson and the viewpoints provided in the “Rethinking History” article I would agree with the third decision to keep Jackson on the bill but provide education about Jackson’s legacy. There is never a way to please everyone, you can only please the majority or maintain a compromise, and to me option three is the compromise. Americans want to take Jackson off the twenty because of his views about slavery, but by taking him off wouldn’t we just be denying all of the bad that he did and erasing them from the public eye? Jackson can definitely be seen as a controversial president ranging between his racism towards African Americans and Native Americans and paying of the entire national debt and his history as a war hero. From “Rethinking History” by renaming buildings named after controversial historical figures in an attempt to show their true colors you are only erasing any attempt at bringing forth the negative attention they may well deserve. Without men like George Washington, Woodrow Wilson, Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson being viewed in a way the public could regularly see their names wouldn’t be known at all. In order to move forward and push past racism and slavery the Federal Reserve and owners of buildings named after controversial figures need to educate the public on both the good and evil they have committed. By erasing Andrew Jackson his name could fall in with those like William Henry Harrison, John Tyler and James Polk who were all slave owning presidents but didn’t have a large enough positive effect to be put on dollar bills or have large buildings named after them. You also must consider the concept of when do we stop? If we begin with eliminating the dollar bill and buildings named after slave owners then how do we know, as Americans, when to stop; because the idea of erasing bad aspects of history leaves nothing to learn of off because they never “existed”. Therefore in conclusion I believe that Andrew Jackson should be left on the bill and owners of buildings and the Federal Reserve should educate the public on the good and bad aspects of these historical figures. The issue with Andrew Jackson is only the beginning in a balance between how much of history we can afford to forget in order to move forward as a country.
21. Ashley Stewart January 24, 2016 at 12:03 am

    In my opinion, I would select the second alternative choice, that Jackson should be removed form the $20 bill and replaced with another historical figure. Despite Jackson being a war hero from the War of 1812 or, perhaps saving an Indian boy during a campaign to eradicate Indians, we have to look at an overview of Jackson’s actions. The portion we have learned in class is predominantly negative, especially when he was the president of our country. Leaving on that note, I’d like to bring up three vital facts of Jackson’s presidency: The Indian Removal Act/ Trails of Tears, Jackson’s dueling past due to his temper, and the vetoing of the re-chartering of the second Bank of the U.S. In 1830, Jackson made the Indian Removal Act, which proposed the removal of all Eastern Indians to the west. This went against the promise of President Jefferson that if the five Cherokee tribes became more white, they’d be able to blend in and that they were free from white encroachments. More than 100,000 Indians were forced from their homelands, because President Jackson, the Georgians, and other whites were greedy for more land to settle. Jackson simply considered himself helping, “this much injured race.” However, the unpleasant Indian treatment did not stop there. The Trail of Tears took place during the fall and winter of 1838-1839 and was a 116 day trek. As Indians migrated, the Indian population that began in the east continuously shrunk going westwards. Due to starvation, disease, and the bitter cold, 4,000 Indians died. In regards to the vetoing of the second BUS, Jackson was against it because he thought it cheated the common people and he hated paper money. Having him on the $20 bill is truly preposterous and inconceivable. President Jackson is more in likely rolling in his grave since, he did not support or promote the bank, but despised it. The only question then, is why are we honoring him on the $20 bill? In the past days of Jackson, before he became president to be more exact, there were a total of three duels with Waightstill Avery, an attorney and war veteran; John Sevier, the 1st governor of Tennessee; and Charles Dickinson, an attorney. The most well known duel was with Charles Dickinson, which was caused by Dickinson publishing negative articles on Jackson and his deceased spouse Rachel. Charles died and Jackson had a bullet lodged so deep in his chest, near his heart, that it had to remain where it was. Remember, we are honoring and having this man, Andrew Jackson, represent a piece of our money. A man whose temper reached such a limit, that he felt obligated to display his power and honor through a duel.
    Instead of having Jackson on our $20, we should in fact replace him with someone else. This alternative candidate should be an individual who went through true hardships to change the world and our future into a better place. My ideal choices would be, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. or, Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Martin Luther King Jr. fought for the end of racial discrimination, desegregation, and civil rights for African-Americans. He greatly influenced John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson to create the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which ended segregation in public areas and discontinued the discrimination of race, color, religion, origin, and sex in the work force. Also, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that allowed all citizens, no matter the race, to vote. From his audacious actions and perseverance, he left a mark upon the world that inspired others to fight for their natural rights.
    Previously, I’ve just heard about Elizabeth Cady Stanton (from my Google docs) and learned that she fought for the civil rights of women and was an abolitionist. She not only participated numerous anti-slavery movements, but organized the first Women’s Rights Convention in 1848. This historical changing convention discussed the matters of women’s taxation without representation, men’s dominance over women, and women’s loss of individualism under the law. Stanton is also responsible for the National Women’s Loyal League with Susan B. Anthony in 1863 and the National Women Suffrage Association. Elizabeth Stanton’s efforts have impacted our future greatly, as you can see, Hilary Clinton is even running for president. Back then, this wouldn’t have been a plausible, let alone sane idea.
    Now, some may argue that Dr. King is already remembered through statues, memorials, and schools, but having him on the $20 bill would further King’s legacy, his dream. First an African-American president and then an African-American on U.S money would truly be a great leap forward to a changed America. A counter-argument for the selection of Elizabeth Stanton could be that the U.S already has seven women representing their money (Sacajawea, Susan B. Anthony, Helen Keller, first lady coins, Eunice Kennedy Shriver, Eleanor and Virginia Dare, and Martha Washington) and are supposed to have a woman replace Hamilton on the $10 bill in 2020. However, recognizing our historical women helps to show how much America has progressed over the years. We can continue being a role model to other areas that may not allow rights for women. In sense of the “slippery slope” fallacy and the Rethinking History article, asking if we should re-name Washington D.C because Washington was a slave owner, I feel that if the individual’s morals and actions overpower their negative aspects then their name/image can remain on things today (money, schools, buildings, etc.). We have to take into consideration that owning slaves back then was a way of profit and viewed differently than today. Also, George Washington was selected as our first president of the United States and fought valiantly in the Revolutionary War without accepting pay. With this said, I stand by the second choice to remove Andrew Jackson off of the $20 bill and replace him with other historical figures that have endured challenges to hear their voice heard and make a difference. People under this title consist of civil rights activist and desegregationist Martin Luther King Jr. and women activists like Elizabeth Cady Stanton.
22. emma gillard January 24, 2016 at 10:15 am

    I remember when we talked about this in the eighth grade. I didn’t really know anything about American history. It was my first history class in America nd I didn’t know what was happening. And one day my teacher came into the classroom and told us w were going to have to talk about Andrew Jackson, I had no idea who that was but then when we started talking about him, we each got to chose a side. Should he stay on the $20 bill or should we change it. I don’t exactly remember which side I ended up on but I think it was a pretty equally split. This year before we started talking about him, I didn’t exactly remember what he had done so I think it’s a good thing that we went over his presidency before we had this blog. In the end I believe we should keep him on the $20 bill because even though everything he has done wasn’t perfect, he still fought for what he believed in and he was president. And the people in the past really believed in him and loved him s president so I think that’s why we should keep him, we don’t have the same point of view as the people in the past so we might not know everything there is to know so I think as long as we know people believed in him and they thought it was a good thing that he was president, I think we should keep him on the $20 bill.
23. Heather Flannery January 24, 2016 at 10:31 am

    The issue of having Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill has been an ongoing issue for years now. I recall first hearing about this issue one morning on a news station and I automatically liked the idea of changing Andrew Jackson to someone else, preferably a woman. This is much before I became fully educated on Jackson’s legacy. Now, my opinion has changed. I believe that Jackson should be kept on the $20 bill for many reasons. The argument of Jackson owning slaves is invalid because many others on other forms of money such as George Washington previously owned slaves as well. He took over land from Natives and the Spanish, but he is continuously thought of as a war hero after the Battle of New Orleans. Jackson also did and had some good qualities. He came from the common people which made him more relatable to those who he was governing over. Jackson was not put on the bill because of his perceivably negative actions, but of the accomplishments he made in bettering the United States. Instead of changing the face of the $20 bill, the public should be educated on who Andrew Jackson truly was. After I became educated on who he was, my viewpoint was drastically changed. Even though I do not agree with many of the things Jackson did, he was still a major and important part of the early stages of the United States of America. No matter if Andrew Jackson continues to stay on the $20 bill or someone new replaces him, no one will ever be perfect in everyone’s eyes continuously causing controversy.
24. jacob smith January 24, 2016 at 11:18 am

    Throughout the course of American history there have been many noble, notable and unrecognized heroes of all genders and races. Some of these American heroes are awarded with their faces on American money. Unfortunately Andrew Jackson found his way to the face of the twenty-dollar bill without being a true hero due to his many injustices. I believe that the reason for the faces plastered on American currency is so that the American people can see their faces and never forget their legacy. I think that Andrew Jackson’s actions cannot be forgotten soon enough. While other people may contest that he was a noble war hero and deserves to remain on the bill, it is important to remember that his most victorious battle was fought after the end of a war and most importantly he was the cause of an entire peoples destruction. The people on the currency of America represent the best and most noble of the American people and frankly I see it as an embarrassment to still hold someone who ordered the death and destruction of a race and culture with such high honor. Because of this I completely agree with the idea that he should be replaced with someone who truly was noble. Should Andrew Jackson be removed there would be great controversy over his replacement on the twenty. His replacement should definitely be a woman because unfortunately the only people on American money are white men. The replacement should also be someone who truly believed in equality for all. Therefore Harriet Tubman would truly be a great replacement.
25. Harvey R. January 24, 2016 at 11:57 am

    After reading the article “Rethinking History” and considering how many of the points in the article apply to Andrew Jackson, I believe that Andrew Jackson should be removed from $20 bill and his actions be spoken about in classes. In the article, Wilglory Tanjong, a sophomore at Princeton spoke about how the university honors Woodrow Wilson, even though he had racist views: “‘We don’t want Woodrow Wilson’s legacy to be erased…We think it is extremely important that we understand our history of this campus. But we think that you can definitely understand your history without idolizing or turning Wilson into some kind of god…”. The same could apply to Andrew Jackson. If people better understood how immoral and despicable Jackson was to Native Americans, many would probably agree in removing him from the $20 bill. Having him on there is idolizing and honoring him as a great man that did good for our nation, however, most of what he did is controversial and had much opposition. He was one of the main people behind the Trails of Tears due to his Indian Removal Act. Having a POC or a woman that helped bring America another step closer to equality on the $20 bill would show us progressing as a nation as we differ from the theme of slave owning white men on the currency. Although he was a war hero, his vile ethnic discrimination against Native Americans proves that we should not keep this racist on our money, instead replacing him with a person that changed America for the better, in order to cause our society to be progressive from our oppressive past selves.
26. Alanna Rosenthal January 24, 2016 at 12:08 pm

    After reading the article Rethinking History and using my own personal thought into this matter, I believe that Andrew Jackson should be removed from the $20 bill. The ideal way of doing such a thing is by educating the American people on why he is not the best person to be on our American form of currency. I believe that Andrew Jackson should be removed from the $20 bill because the negatives of his presidency outweighs the positives. Jackson was very racist towards African Americans and gave his slaves very cruel punishments for the minor accidents that occurred. For example, when his slaves or any other slaves ran away, he would offer a reward for whipping the slaves 300 times once founded. He also had about 140 slaves on his plantation.Not only was Jackson a raging racist towards African Americans, but also Native Americans. I think that the way he handled Native Americans is the number one reason why he should be removed from the $20 bill. This is because he executed them unnecessarily and voiced his opinion of his resentments toward them. He conducted the trail of tears and gave false hope to the Native Americans. This false hope was fueled by the idea, thought by Native Americans, that if they integrated more “white American” ways into their society, they would not be seen as the uncivilized people that most white americans thought they were during this time. Yes, Andrew Jackson can be credited for the rise of nationalism in the US and having affection towards the common man, but does that make him deserving of being on the $20 bill? In many cases of race problems that occurred with past presidents and politicians, we must look at the pros and cons of them still being remembered in a positive manor. Properly informing the American public on why or why not these people can be discredited is vital to never leaving past problems to be forgotten. Andrew Jackson should be removed from the $20 bill because configuring to societies racist norms in the 1800s should not be “ok” and should never be forgotten.
27. Justin Sherman January 24, 2016 at 12:36 pm

    After everything that I have learned about Andrew Jackson it is hard for me to understand how he is still on the $20 dollar bill. I believe that it is because he owned slaves, he is a main cause of removing Native Americans from their own land, and was against paper money. Slave owners at this time treated these people like property. It was people like Jackson that gave slaves no rights and treated them in a way that no one should ever be treated. Having Jackson on this bill is portraying America with a person who mistreated and gave no rights to people who did no wrong. He was also very involved in the Indian Removal Act. This act forced an entire population out of their homes. The people living in this land where there first and had the land. Instead of approving this act by congress he could have tried to make a compromise with them instead of forcing them to flee and killing thousands of these innocent people. Lastly, i find it very ironic that Jackson is on the $20 dollar bill when he was so against paper money. Jackson preferred gold and silver coins or “hard money” rather than paper currency. I believe that we should remove Andrew Jackson from the $20 dollar bill and replace him with Harriet Tubman. Unlike Jackson, Tubman helped to free the slaves from their miserable lives and take them to freedom. Harriet Tubman is much more worthy of having her face on the $20 dollar bill that Andrew Jackson.
28. Ruby Kolender January 24, 2016 at 12:55 pm

    After studying Andrew Jackson’s presidency and reading the article “Should colleges continue to honor famous alumni who were racists?”, I have come to the conclusion that Jackson should remain on the $20 bill, as long as it is apparent to our society why this is controversial. Andrew Jackson was considered a war hero at his time for fighting in the War of 1812, and without him, the country might not have gained its complete independence from Britain. In the midst of his great battles, however, he had destroyed the Creek Nation in the Battle of Horseshoe Bend, and his most heroic Battle of New Orleans didn’t even have a true impact because the Treaty of Ghent had already been signed. Knowing that he was extremely beneficial in the making of our country, which should allow him to remain on the 20, his legacy still must be talked about. The passing of the Indian Removal Act then leading to The Trail of Tears is obviously something that we don’t want to remember a war hero by. With that being said, we can’t expect all people of the 1800s to live up to today’s standards. Yes he was a slave owner and despised Indians which I am completely against, but wasn’t that normal for most of the population in the 19th century? As the article against Princeton’s Woodrow Wilson recognition reads “Others believe it might be more constructive for Princeton and other universities to leave the disputed names on the facilities, but use them to teach students about slavery, racism, and segregation in America’s history” (Potenza 7). As a society, we have to come to terms that we can’t erase the flaws of the past, so in other words, Jackson must stay on the 20 in order to facilitate further discussions about both the positive and negative impacts he left on our country.
29. Katie Westerlund January 24, 2016 at 1:22 pm

    Andrew Jackson should stay on the $20 bill. One cannot say that we should take him off because he owned slaves. George Washington, who is on the most carried bill (the one dollar) owned slaves while in office and Ben Franklin, who is on the hundred dollar bill also owned slaves. Another president who owned salves and is on our currency is Ulysses S. Grant. He is on the fifty-dollar bill and although he only owned a few slaves, he still owned them. So for one to say we should take Jackson off because he owned slaves would mean we should also take our first president off our currency? I don’t think so. In addition to this, Andrew Jackson was the first president that was truly for and from the people. He was not from the upper class, nor was he from any elite ancestry; we need to keep a man like that on at least one of our currency bills. I am sure that one could find one aspect of each person on each bill that would make a person want to take the person on the bill off of it. I understand that people want a woman on the bill but if any people should want to put a woman on the bill that Alexander Hamilton is currently on because there has been talk of that and since it is getting remodeled soon I agree with it. I find that having Jackson on a bill is important because of who he represented and how. Of course some things he did, as president, weren’t in the countries best interests but that really comes with any president. The election of Andrew Jackson was a turning point in American history there was a shift in power from east to west as he took office. Jackson was for the people. Jackson’s Presidency helped build a democratic party that would become a strong force in American politics. So why not keep Jackson on the $20 bill?
30. Callie B January 24, 2016 at 3:04 pm

    While no one is perfect and there is no denying that Andrew Jackson did much to set up how our country is today, I do think he should be taken off the twenty dollar bill. It’s easily justifiable to why he should remain on the bill; he was a widely liked president as a “common man” and did much to strengthen states’ rights. And that’s how a lot of people still recognize him, however, with a total lack of knowledge for the complete disregard Jackson had for Native Americans. Prior to the Trail of Tears which resulted in the death of nearly 4,000 Cherokee, the Natives were just trying to preserve what little of their ancestors land they had left. Even when the Supreme Court supported their stay, Jackson basically gave Georgians free reign to run in and force the Cherokee out of their homes. By keeping him on our American currency, it shows we glorify his racist and degrading actions to a race we as Americans still neglect today. Andrew Jackson also shouldn’t be on our twenty dollar bill because he was completely against paper money and put a lot of effort into successfully bringing down the Bank of The United Stated (BUS), as he distrusted it and saw it as a way for the wealthy to get more money. To currently have him on one of our paper bills is if anything, and offense to his political views on the bank. While it’s still important to understand the good Jackson did for our country it is of equal if not more importance to remember the people he disrespected and wanted killed off, and how by having his portrait on our twenty dollar bill gives the impression that America stands for the oppression of an entire race. Whether it is a women or just someone who represents something more justifiable than Andrew Jackson, I stand by the opinion that Jackson should be removed by the bill and leave him to be discussed in history classrooms.
31. Stephanie J January 24, 2016 at 3:29 pm

    After reading “Rethinking History”, I think that Andrew Jackson should be left on the 20 dollar bill, but people should just be well educated about who he was and what he did. If we made the change of taking him off of the 20 dollar bill, there would be so many other things that would also have to be changed. This is because there were many other racist leaders that have had things named after them. There are buildings, states, and schools named after presidents that were also morally wrong.
    Andrew Jackson is seen two ways. One way is that he was the first president to be considered a “common man” and he was the first Democratic President. The other way he is seen is that he caused the trail of tears; he was a slaveholder, and a morally wrong person. It is true that he was wrong, but what good would it do to take him off of the 20 dollar bill now when it has been so many years and now that it’s been brought up we can use it to educate people of him and other presidents as well.
    People should know the bad things he had done and the reasons he was put on the 20 dollar bill in the first place. I think that people knowing of his mistakes and being able to use them as an example will further our country. It’s important that if we keep Jackson on the 20 dollar bill, his wrong doings are shown.
32. Olivia S. January 24, 2016 at 3:33 pm

    Personally, I side most with the first option of keeping Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill. It is very easy to argue that Jackson is not worthy of being on the $20 bill because of the passing of the Indian Removal Act, the vetoing of the BUS charter, and his bad temper along with his rash decision-making. Realistically, it would probably be quite the hassle to remove Andrew Jackson from the $20 bill and replace him with someone else. Although there are many people who are upset with the fact that he is on the $20 bill despite the horrible things he did during his presidency, I highly doubt that anyone refuses to use the $20 bill because Andrew Jackson is on it. In my opinion, it’s not that big of a deal. If Andrew Jackson was worthy enough to be elected president for two terms, then he is obviously worthy enough to be the face of the $20 bill. Most people dwell on the negative results of his presidency, but many fail to recognize the great things Jackson did for our country. Not only was he a war hero such as in the Battle of New Orleans, but he also paid off the entire national debt. As mentioned in the article “Rethinking History”, changing one name or face would lead to a slippery slope of name changes. It is best to not change things even though people may be upset about it now. If the person was worthy enough for their name or face to be put there in the first place, then he or she is worthy enough now. If we compare the moral standards of back then with the moral standards of present day, we would have to change the names of practically everything. It’s best to leave the $20 bill as is and move on.
33. Alexis Arbaugh January 24, 2016 at 4:16 pm

    I think that either leaving Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill or taking him off of it is a very tricky topic because people have so many different opinions about him. Some people love him and think he is one of the greatest things to happen in our history. And then there’s the other half that hated him and everything he stood for. From learning about him in my APUSH class I have learned of both sides of him, the nice and the not so nice. I believe that Jackson should be taken off the $20 bill because his bad actions by far outweigh the good ones. I mean sure he helped build this country into what it is today. But do we really want someone on our paper money who didn’t believe in the bank and also didn’t want paper money in the first place. He also pushed out and brutally murdered all of the Indians in order for us to move westward and expand. He was also a slave owner that treated them very baldy. But if we take him off the $20 then who do we put on it? Most historians say that it should be a female. I agree, I think having a female on our money, especially someone like Harriet Tubman, would be awesome for the country. Harriet Tubman was a black lady that would take slaves through the Underground Railroad and up to Canada in order to escape slavery. Harriet Tubman represents freedom. We are in the 21st century and have a black president we can surely put a women on our money, no problem. In schools it is still important to continue to talk about Andrew Jackson how he was, we should not sugar coat the bad things that he has done because that’s not the way our history went done. I am not saying that now we should go around, find everything about history that is wrong and change the name of it because that would take forever and it would be hard because of different opinions. I think that starting with changing the face on the $20 bill is a good start that will have a chain reaction that will get people to notice these things and have say in it.
34. Mary Kauffman January 24, 2016 at 4:18 pm

    I agree with option 3, which states that we should leave Jackson on the $20 bill, but still educate people of his legacies. Like is says in the article, If the criteria for naming a building after someone, states that they have to be perfect, then we shouldn’t name buildings, because it’s impossible for people to make the right decisions 100% of the time because no one’s perfect. Even George Washington, whom our capital was named after, was a slave owner that does not mean that we should rename our capital. I am not saying that I agree with their decisions, to be racist or own slaves, but you also have to remember that Jackson lived in a different time period, it was normal back then for rich wealthy, white, male landowners to own slaves. Jackson wasn’t all bad either, he made some great decisions as president that made him such an important historical figure. For example, he supported the “common man” and felt that the government was only helping the rich people, he also led some very important battles, like the Battle of New Orleans, and took part in the Revolutionary war. If we looked at all the mistakes that our nation’s political figures made, we would be renaming everything, because like I said before, no one’s perfect. However, let’s say we did take Jackson off the 20 dollar bill, what good what that do, it not going to change history. Keeping Jackson on the 20 dollar bill will remind America of the bad things he did, and hopefully will keep us from doing the things he did.
35. Matthew B. January 24, 2016 at 4:50 pm

    Upon reading the article “Rethinking History”, and thinking about all of the possible ways that society could be changed today, I believe that Andrew Jackson should remain on the twenty-dollar bill. Andrew Jackson was a slave owner, and did greatly harm a number of Indian tribes, but I think it may be too late to change this. Most American’s who know something about history would not associate these things with Jackson, as his legacy focused much more on the positive aspects. Going along with option number three which was presented, I do believe that there should be an effort to educate the people of the United States on what Andrew Jackson, and other significant political figures, accomplished during their lives. The education of the public should not focus on neither the positive aspects nor the negative aspects, but instead view their lives from a neutral point of view. If we were indeed going to remove Jackson from the twenty, would it also be necessary to remove other significant figures from our nations past on our currency and buildings? It wouldn’t seem right if we took George Washington, our nations founder, and renamed the capital due to the fact that he owned slaves. All of these men in my opinion deserve their mark on our nation today, but as we move forward, we should start to consider women, African-Americans, and other races to name our buildings or our currency after. I do recognize why some people may argue for the removal of these men’s names and faces from our nations currency and buildings, but I do not think they need to be removed, we just need to better educate the citizens on what the men did.
36. Camille Rochaix January 24, 2016 at 5:58 pm

    2 years ago, in my 8th grade social studies class, my teacher made us do a project on if we believed Andrew Jackson should be taken off the 20 dollar bill or not. My answer has not changed Andrew Jackson should be taken off the 20 dollar bill. Reading the “Rethinking History” article, I have come to understand the reason why people might want him to stay on the 20-dollar bill, and you may call me stubborn, but my answer has not wavered. I understand that nobody is perfect, and that everything has its shady areas, though with Andrew Jackson I feel that the cons outweigh the pros. Andrew Jackson gained his glory as the general who led the United States to victory in the Battle of New Orleans. Which killed thousands of British Soldiers, and turned out to have been useless, which meant all those deaths were for nothing, since the War of 1812 had been declared over a few weeks earlier. Sure those deaths were not American lives, so they might not matter as much, but in a country who stands by Declaration of Independence, that ‘all men are created equal’, which shows that these men, who were the same as the Americans, died for no reason. He also signed off on the trail of tears, and pushed and subsequently killed thousands of Indians who had done nothing to the Americans but do what they had been asked to do; were European clothing, change religions, learn American culture, educate their children in English, etc. I feel that somebody else should replace Andrew Jackson, whether it is a woman or not, I think that teaching and educating people about Andrew Jackson’s legacy is easy, he is taught in schools, he is in our text books, and what he did should not be forgotten, though we do not to be reminded of what he did by having him on the 20 dollar bill.
37. Maggie Bills January 24, 2016 at 6:14 pm

    I personally don’t have an opinion on this topic… but I think it could go either way because even though Jackson has a rough past he shouldn’t be removed from the 20 dollar bill because every president had at least one dark part in their lives and this topic has been talked about so much to no end. But even with everyone debating it he’s still on the bill so why change it now? Personally doesn’t matter to me because I can never remember who is on which bill so even if you change it I still wouldn’t really be affected by it, it’s just more money we’d be spending on money which seems a little pointless but I mean let the government do whatever it wants. But I could also go the other way, as a woman in the changing world, women deserve a strong independent woman of history on the bill. So I’m more of a, could go with Jackson could go with someone else but whatever happens I’m fine with it. Because I mean when I’m lucky enough to have a 20 dollar bill I tend to put it away and not look at it and thing “huh wow why is this person here and should we change it to this person?” that just doesn’t happen. I’m also not a huge history buff so either way it’s really just money to me and yeah it would be cool for a woman to be on it but it’s also fine if it doesn’t change. (Sorry if I offend anyone)
38. Rachel Berg January 24, 2016 at 6:36 pm

    Out of the three options you have provided us with, I personally believe that the first alternative is the path we should take. Jackson should not be taken off the $20 bill for the following reasons. Even though Jackson did many bad things, it has made the country what it is today. As you mentioned up above, Jackson was a slave owner, disliked the Indians, and had issues with the second BUS. During Jackson’s time period, slavery was ok and everyone owned plantations and had slaves working for them. Today, we see this as a very bad thing but we can’t pretend like the slavery era of America didn’t exist. Also, back then it was normal for men to own plantations and slaves, so for Jackson to have some slaves too is actually “ok” for back then. His face on the $20 bill reminds us how far America has come from those times and that our country keeps improving. For all these reasons, Jackson was a common man just like everyone else he had his own opinions about political differences. This is one of the main reasons why the people voted for him during his election. During his presidency Jackson didn’t just see things from the presidents point of view because he understood the common man. He was seen as a normal person and not higher than everyone else. Therefore, we all make mistakes and have our own opinions that people might not agree with. On that note, I think Jackson represents some of the foundation of the U.S and he should stay on the $20 bill because it signifies the creation of America.
39. Scotti P. January 24, 2016 at 7:14 pm

    Andrew Jackson should be left on the $20 bill, but the significance of his legacy should be taught so people have a better understanding of his accomplishments and failures. After reading “Rethinking History”, I realized that I strongly agree with a point made in the article that stated “If the criteria for naming a building for someone was that they’d be perfect we shouldn’t name buildings.” Jackson did many great things for the US government and helped shape the way our society is today by promoting the common man. But his failures need to be taught and recognized. His views and actions he took towards Native Americans were terrible and his reputation of making irrational decisions show that he was not perfect by any means. As the article mentioned, we cannot hold historical figures to the expectations of today’s standards. It is unrealistic to believe that they held the same morals as most people do today because of how different their society was. I believe it is important to acknowledge our country’s history and educate people appropriately. This is an important step in recognizing that America’s history is far, far from perfect. Universities considering changing important aspects of their schools, like their seals and names of buildings, is not a terrible idea. Although the same reasoning the schools are using could be applied to removing Jackson from the $20, it is a national symbol and something that represents our entire country. There would have to be much more consideration put into changing it than just changing something for a school, which there has been. I have heard talk of changing the $20 for a while and I am still unsure of where I stand but for now, educating people on his legacy is the most important thing to do.
40. Vanessa H January 24, 2016 at 7:24 pm

    Despite the ‘slippery slope’ argument, I still believe Andrew Jackson should be removed from the 20 dollar bill and replaced with an influential woman in history. True, not all of the other founding fathers on our currency were perfect, but none of them were as bad as Jackson. Jackson was a good president in some respects, but does not deserve to be on our currency along with George Washington. Jackson was a slave owner that treated his slaves horribly. As well, Jackson was the reason that the Trail of Tears happened. He caused the death of countless Native American lives all so that more farm land could be recruited. He didn’t care about the land’s significance to the Natives. As well, when it came to Worcester v. Georgia, Jackson deliberately ignored the Supreme Court’s ruling simply because it ruled in favor of Indians. He went back on words of previous presidents in treaties with the Native Americans. The Georgians were allowed to beat or kill Indians just to get them off Cherokee land with no consequences to them personally. The natives were pushed out with no time to gather their belongings or pack. The Native Americans were then forced to travel west. However, they were forced to travel during what was described as one of the worst winters experienced. Many Indians died on the way from cold, starvation, or disease. As well, Jackson ruined America’s economy during his time in office. He shut down the BUS, since he was in favor of paper money and did not like the idea of the federal government controlling a bank since he viewed as a bank that served the elite and wealthy. Keeping Jackson on the 20 is sending the message that we are ignoring all of the horrible acts he had committed.
41. Matt August January 24, 2016 at 7:25 pm

    This blog post about Andrew Jackson is well timed. An Oklahoma Senator has just introduced a bill in Congress to remove Andrew Jackson from the twenty dollar bill. I support this Senator’s views of the former President. Andrew Jackson became President of the United States on March 4 1829, and in 1928 the former President was honored by having his face placed on the twenty dollar bill. Only now are people asking how such a terrible, bloodthirsty, and racist person could become President of the United States and be honored with great men such as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, and Benjamin Franklin. We know that Andrew Jackson was a killer. Jackson killed hundreds of people without any sense of remorse, burning down villages with little emotion. The nickname “Old Hickory” was given to Jackson by his own men to show how tough and ruthless he was by stating that he was emotionless as a tree. Andrew Jackson committed ethnic cleansing against Native Americans community. He was also a slave owner. People will argue with my opinion and say that Jackson was a product of his time, and that other Presidents on our currency were also slave owners such as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. But have any of those Presidents truly despised a race so much that they commit acts worthy of classification as war crimes today. Most Americans see Jackson as a worthy President who “stood up for the common people”. In reality this man is a disgrace to the American ideal of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and should be stripped of the honor given to him. Children should be taught that he was a man that should not be honored. Rather, he was a man who fell victim to the racism of his time and a leader of one of the worst genocide’s in American History.
42. Ari Mattler January 24, 2016 at 7:26 pm

    After studying the life of Andrew Jackson and living my own life giving his face to others for purchases, I do not think he should be taken of the twenty dollar bill. Yes, I understand the faults and controversies of his life. Andrew Jackson even before his presidency did controversial things. Killing Indians in battles, forcefully taking Florida, and other actions. However, during his time in office things did not get much better. Jackson went against John Marshall’s Supreme Court and enforced the removal of thousands of Native Americans. His speech often came with controversy, often mentioning his desire to hang John C. Calhoun or shoot Henry Clay. Andrew Jackson was a man whose personal life was also viewed as controversial with his marriage to a woman who was not divorced. However, even with all of these flaws Jackson should remain on the paper currency. Ironically, Jackson hated the Bank of the United States, but was put on a bill in 1928. Being on a bill for as long as anyone could remember, why change it now. Trying to right his wrongs by erasing him from visual history is not the right way to approach this problem. Keep him on the bill but make sure to highlight the imperfections of his life. Keeping his faults recognized and not washed away in a flood of controversy is the most patriotic approach. And while some will still complain that it is unjust to keep such a figure on one of the most seen pieces of artwork, installing a woman or even any other figure is just the government trying to make a certain group happy, which in the end, as always, would just anger another one.
43. Claire B January 24, 2016 at 7:40 pm

    After reading “Rethinking History”, I believe Andrew Jackson should be removed from the $20 bill. I think he should be removed because of his treatment of Native Americans, his disrespect of federal rule, and his owning of slaves. Andrew Jackson implemented the Indian Removal Act, which forced the Indians of their land, which they the rights to. It was a terrible moment for the U.S. in our relationship with the Native Americans. Jackson also disregard federal rule when John Marshall ruled that the Cherokee had rights to their land in Georgia, but Jackson did nothing to enforce this and even urged the Georgians to get rid of the Indians. He also did not recharter the bank and destroyed our economic security. He was also a slave owner. I believe he should be taken off the bill but his legacy can still continue on in books and classrooms through good education. I think a woman of historical significance should replace him. I think some great candidates would be Clara Barton, creator of the Red Cross, Eleanor Roosevelt, First Lady, Harriet Tubman, conductor of the Underground Railroad, or Susan B. Anthony, a prominent leader in the Women’s Suffrage Movement. I believe any of these women would be great choices as they all made significant differences in their time periods and are still taught about in history.I also think it is about time that a women should get to be a symbol of the United States and not just all these men. Almost all of the monuments in D.C. are for men and right now our currency is occupied by men, so it would be nice to honor a women for a change.
44. Emma Lucken January 24, 2016 at 7:41 pm

    I believe that we should remove President Andrew Jackson from the twenty-dollar bill. Jackson didn’t support the second Bank of the United States or paper money, a fact that is ironic because that is where he is immortalized. Besides his views on the BUS, Andrew Jackson was terribly cruel to American Indians. The Trail of Tears is one of the most tragic events to happen in American History, besides slavery of course. Immortalizing Andrew Jackson on the twenty ignores all the work we have done to recognize the plight of our country’s first inhabitants. Andrew Jackson may have been a popular president but isn’t Donald Trump popular now? Both of these men reached out to poor, white Americans and promised that they would make lives better. Donald Trump appeals to the masses because he is seen as a man who isn’t tangled in politics already. The people want a man who is “innocent” and won’t continue the hierarchy of modern politics. This is almost an exact description of the reasons Andrew Jackson was elected. Drawing these parallels to Donald Trump should illustrate the many ways Andrew Jackson failed as a decent human being and should not have a place of honor on our currency. There are so many other people who deserve the place of honor that Andrew Jackson still holds. Harriet Tubman saved countless lives and fought for freedom everyday of her life; Susan B. Anthony worked for women’s suffrage and did so much for women today, yet they aren’t being recognized for their work. Even male presidents such as Franklin Roosevelt or Dwight Eisenhower did more for our country than Andrew Jackson. If you recall, Jackson left America’s economy in a mess, he tried and failed to control our “runaway economy” in 1836. His work in killing Nicholas Biddle’s BUS (which was albeit corrupt but fundamental in our nation’s economy) led to a financial panic and crash in 1837. By this dark time, Jackson had already retired to his comfortable home and left the next president to deal with the nation’s mess. This isn’t heroic; it’s foolish and pathetic. Andrew Jackson did own slaves but many men at the time did and, sadly, it was a way of life. I don’t support it in any way but I don’t believe that based on this alone, Andrew Jackson should be removed from the twenty. The article “Rethinking History” details reasons why influential people should or should not be removed from places of honor. Many students said that seeing plaques or statues of these famous but controversial people served as a constant reminder that they didn’t quite fit in. What does it say about our country if we have a man who was nicknamed “Indian Killer” on our currency? Put yourself in the shoes on Native Americans in our country, every time they pay for something they see the face of the man who led to the demise of their beloved way of life. This is wrong and why, in my opinion, Andrew Jackson should be removed from his place of honor upon the twenty-dollar bill.
45. Claire Cassar January 24, 2016 at 7:51 pm

    Personally, I think America has really weird morals and beliefs. We want to be called the land of the free and preach equality for all, but we seem to ignore that the country has been built on people in power who aren’t open to all kinds of freedom. Most of our founding fathers and prominent historical figures have huge flaws that get swept away. Andrew Jackson, like most of the people in power, had major flaws. In my view, He basically tried to hide the fact Indians were part of America by uprooting and killing them. The flaws of most figures are hidden. I think history should be taught how it happened and not cut out the parts that make us look like anything but our idea of “land of the free”. I think if we’re going to remove racist figures’ images, Andrew Jackson should be one of them. I don’t think he took the right way of dealing with Native Americans. Other presidents also were racist or slaveholders, but that’s how things were before. Jackson had the option of how to deal with the people who were here first. We can replace him with someone such as Rosa Parks, Maya Angelou, or Harriet Tubman. They are all influential women of color in history. Without them, major movements could not have had such an impact. Or Edith Bowling Wilson, who ran the country when her husband was ill. Eleanor Roosevelt also played a key role in women’s and American history. Martin Luther King is also super crucial because he was peaceful and led major movements. I think it is important to have either a woman or person of color to be on currency. They are so important to this country and we can’t only praise white men. People also need to be educated on the discriminatory traits of history. Without being educated, it can be dangerous because people will assume things that are definitely not true. To have only part of an understanding on American history is no accepting the country we are.
46. Bianca G January 24, 2016 at 8:20 pm

    I am surprisingly torn when it comes to the issue at hand. On one hand I firmly believe that Andrew Jackson was a terrible person and should not be honored in everyday American life by being immortalized on the twenty dollar bill. He was a slave owner and he was responsible (basically) for the trail of tears and the Indian removal act. This is not the hero of ages that we should be admiring. This is a villain who stains american history with his misdeeds. And I also don’t believe it would be too difficult to change the face on the bill to a more deserving person-perhaps even a women if we’re getting really crazy! However all that being said I think there is some sort of poetic justice to the well know fact that Jackson hated paper money and banks in general. What better way to mock his memory by keeping him on the bill? All jokes aside I do believe that we should no longer have Jackson on the twenty. And that someone more fitting should replace him-like Harriet Tubman. As far as I know there has never been a woman on American currency and what better woman to put other than Harriet. She was an important American historical figure.
    I think that It is also important to remember that looking at historical figures in today’s light often leads to disappointment, as the times are so drastically different. I’m sure the politicians and citizens alike of the present will be regarded as savages in one hundred years. I conclude that Harriet Tubman should be on the twenty and that schools should continue to educate children about the actions of Andrew Jackson.
47. Stephanie Green January 24, 2016 at 8:23 pm

    Through my new knowledge from the article, “Rethinking History” and my own general values, Andrew Jackson should be removed from the $20 bill. I think that his unethical ownership of slaves and the declaration of taking away Native American slaves (leading to the Trail of Tears) should be highly considered when putting someone in a position of leadership and someone we can look up upon. In addition, it’s sort of ironic that someone who vetoed the BUS (thus, disliking the use of paper money) is on the $20 bill, because if he saw him on it today, he would be ashamed.
    Leaving Jackson the $20 bill, specifically with education, just shows to learners that ones accomplishments can outweigh ethics. It leads to the idea that some have of empathy but not action, where they talk about all of the wrongs that he did for minority groups, but is essentially saying that that doesn’t matter because of reason one, two, and three. As a country who claims to acknowledge history and want to move past it, the education would probably be more productive to show that unethical actions, recent or not, will not be tolerated or glorified by the historically anti-black and decolonial state. In addition, I simply don’t think that anyone that contributed to the decolonization of American land and the struggle of African Americans, they shouldn’t be praised in any way. Andrew Jackson also shouldn’t be on it because he hated the BUS. Vetoing it had a pretty major affect on the funding that came along with our country, and the fact that we are putting him on paper currency, something he was extremely against, logically doesn’t make any sense and looks rather odd on the Federal Reserves part. Rather than someone who put us backwards in progression of racial issues in America, I think we should put a figure that contributed to black liberation or to preserve Native American land. While this person would also have flaws, they would not be something that affected marginalized groups of people like Andrew Jackson did.
48. Erinn Costello January 24, 2016 at 8:40 pm

    Over the summer I took a poll asking what important historical women should be represented on the twenty dollar bill. Back then I saw the poll as a feminist movement, not a movement on historical figures with poor reputation. I think in the minds of currency, having a figure who had done improper things viewed from our period in time should not be punished based on the way we address the issue now. For example, since Andrew Jackson had owned slaves, back then it wasn’t seen as the complete evil it is known as today. All of the men on American dollars have impacted American in their own way. Everyone has faults, if they start replacing people it won’t be long till they find something wrong with the next person on the bill. I don’t think it is my decision but, if a difference is really made, I think women are next in line. There’s no need to be repeating faces when there are plenty of significant men and women to be recognized on everyday used currency. If there is a large enough with any of the men representing our nation on our money. I think it is time to change everyone. I couldn’t be that had, most people don’t pay attention to the face that pairs with the number (the only significant one that jumps out at me is franklin). There are plenty of worthy men and definitely women to go around. When I took that poll in the summer there were at least seven to choose from.
49. McKenna Moosekian January 24, 2016 at 8:52 pm

    I do believe that Andrew Jackson should be taken off of the twenty dollar bill for many different reasons. The first reason I have is that he was really into the whole “Indian Removal Act”. This act was in America to remove all Native Americans from the land that was west of the Mississippi River in order to keep America protected and safe. This “Indian Removal Act” was placed while Jackson was president. Jackson did nothing to help these people and just let them be dragged away from there homes and run out of there towns. He allowed Congress to move an entire community out of there rightful place. This is just one of the many reasons why he shouldn’t be on that twenty dollar bill. The second reason he should be removed from the bill is because although many people considered him to be a war hero, he would often duel men and end up killing them for no reasons whatsoever. He just did it to do it. There was a man who made a mockery of Jackson in the newspaper and Jackson retaliated by challenging him to a duel and killing him in the process. The third reason is because Andrew Jackson had owned slaves. This issue is probably the worst out of them all in my opinion. It was one of the worst moments in American History. African Americans were treated like property and very poorly by there slaveowners. African Americans had zero rights because of people that were like Andrew Jackson. American should not be presented by a man who would do such a thing like owning slaves. So really why should a man who did all of these things be on something so monumental? Why should a man who killed for the heck of it, forced people out of their homes and enslaved people be on our twenty dollar bill? He should not get this honor of being on a dollar bill with all of the things that he did wrong in this country. I think learning about these mistakes though will really help us not recreate them. I mean that’s one of the reasons why we learn about history after all.
50. Joe Behrmann January 24, 2016 at 8:54 pm

    I believe that Jackson should stay on the twenty-dollar bill, and leave it to the history classes to teach about him. Being on a dollar bill is not necessarily always for very good people, but for those who had a profound influence on our nation as a whole. Andrew Jackson re-defined what it meant to be president and he is somewhat responsible for why the presidential position is as powerful as it is today. Andrew Jackson did do unspeakable things, however these things cannot be un-done and are and always will be a part of our nation’s history. Removing our history will not save the lives of everyone Jackson had wronged or killed. Also, having the Federal Reserve teach about Jackson’s legacy is still not necessarily doing justice, and if his legacy is taught by the reserve, they may as well just teach about every person on one of the dollar bills because they too had faults. America does not need to try to make itself look perfect, and removing Jackson from the dollar bill would be embellishing the truth. Forcing a woman onto a dollar bill is an insult to women, and eventually there will be a woman on a dollar bill. Jackson has had too large of an effect on America for him not to be on the twenty-dollar bill. Being on the dollar bill is about having an extremely large effect on our country, and it is arguable that he even had the largest effect on our nation’s future than all of the other forefathers on the other dollar bills. Removing Jackson would be a very large mistake that I hope America will not make.