Harriet Tubman Debate

457 Words2 Pages
An effort by Rep. Steve King to keep Harriet Tubman off of the $20 bill was rejected by the House Rules Committee. The Iowa congressman filed an amendment to a Treasury Department funding bill Tuesday that would have prevented redesigning any currency. If the amendment was enacted, it would have halted the scheduled placement of Tubman on the front of $20 bill, replacing President Andrew Jackson in the process. Yet the Rules Committee denied floor consideration of the proposal Tuesday night, meaning Tubman replacing Jackson is still good to go. “It’s not about Harriet Tubman,” King explained to Politico, pulling a $20 bill from his pocket and pointing at Jackson. “Y’know? Why would you want to change that? I am a conservative, I like to keep what we have.” Keep in mind who the man currently on the front of the $20 bill is: Andrew…show more content…
As Reason’s Nick Gillespie noted when the new design was announced, Tubman was not only a leader of the underground railroad, but also a suffragette and a believer of self-defense. Putting her on the front of the $20 bill is a smart decision, and polls from April show Americans agreed with the move. But King says it is “racist” and “sexist” to say a woman or person should be added to currency. It is not clear who it exactly is racist or sexist to, though King had this explanation for Tubman’s addition: "Here 's what 's really happening, this is liberal activism on the part of the president, that 's trying to identify people by categories and he 's divided us on the lines of groups. This is a divisive proposal on the part of the president and mine 's unifying. It says just don 't change anything." King calling his own move “unifying” makes no sense, especially considering the Rules Committee blocked the amendment. The replacement was a change supported by the public, and one that should be done. Yet there was King, standing in opposition of change without any reasoning or
Open Document