Coin Community Family of Web Sites
300,000 items to help build your collection! Specializing in Modern Numismatics Shop CCF Members on eBay! Coin, Banknote and Medal Collectors's Online Mall Vancouvers #1 Coin and Paper Money Dealer Shop for APMEX Bullion on eBay!Royal Canadian Mint products, Canadian, Polish, American, and world coins and banknotes.








Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?


This page may contain links that result in small commissions to keep this free site up and running.

Welcome Guest! Registering and/or logging in will remove the anchor (bottom) ads. It's Free!

Commems Collection Modern: What If? 1976 US Bicentennial Gold Coinage

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 9 / Views: 741Next Topic  
CCF Master Historian of USA Commemoratives
Learn More...
commems's Avatar
United States
12252 Posts
 Posted 06/29/2025  11:01 am Show Profile   Bookmark this topic Add commems to your friends list Get a Link to this Message Number of Subscribers
Between May 12, 1975 and July 24, 1975, no fewer than eight bills (six in the House of Representatives, two in the Senate) were introduced that called for "gold commemorative coins bearing the seal or symbol of the American Revolution Bicentennial Administration."

Emblem of American Revolution Bicentennial Administration (ARBA)
Commems-Collection-Modern:-What-If?-1976-US-Bicentennial-Gold-Coinage

The coin bills were essentially duplicates of each other, and, representative of the time, were all reasonably simple and brief. They did not feature a "Findings" section, a complicated surcharge model or detailed discussion of "emblematic" design requirements - the coin's design was required, however, to include "the seal or symbol of the American Revolution Bicentennial Administration."

The bills were, in fact, fairly open-ended, leaving it to the Secretary of the Treasury to decide the size and weight of the coin, its designs and its mintage. The Secretary was also to decide the composition to be used for the coin's planchet, with the caveat that they "shall contain at least two-thirds gold by weight." It's possible that the Secretary may have decided to issue more than one coin (e.g., a one-ounce coin and a half-ounce coin).

The gold coins were intended to be sold to the public, but not placed into circulation in the same manner as regular coinage. That said, the coins were specified to be legal tender for debts/obligations, public and private. The bills lacked details regarding how the coins were to priced for sale, but a model based on the then-current spot price of gold seems logical.

The House bills were introduced, in chronological order, by:

- John M. Ashbrook (R-OH)
- Tennyson Guyer (R-OH)
- John H.Dent (D-PA)
- William S. Broomfield (R-MI)
- Donald D. Clancy (R-OH)
- John M. Ashbrook (R-OH) - a repeat bill

Upon its introduction, each bill was referred to the House Committee on Banking, Currency and Housing.

The Senate bills were introduced, chronologically, by:

- Mark O. Hatfield (R-OR)
- Charles Mcurdy Mathias, Jr. (R-MD)

Upon their introduction, the Senate bills were referred to the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs.

None of the bills was reported by its respective Committee or considered further. As a result, there would be no gold coins to commemorate the US Bicentennial - several gold medals were struck, however - a good subject for a future post.


For other of my posts about commemorative coins and medals, including other What If? stories, see: Commems Collection.



Collecting history one coin or medal at a time! (c) commems. All rights reserved.
Bedrock of the Community
Learn More...
CelticKnot's Avatar
United States
12811 Posts
 Posted 06/29/2025  6:02 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add CelticKnot to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
None of the bills was reported by its respective Committee or considered further.

Why do you suppose that is? The open-ended nature of them?
Moderator
Learn More...
nickelsearcher's Avatar
United States
15388 Posts
 Posted 06/30/2025  06:06 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add nickelsearcher to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
I'm neutral on the topic - I would not have one in my collection had they been made but don't object to the idea either.


Quote:
several gold medals were struck, however - a good subject for a future post.


I look forward to reading about these. I have several PNC with Bicentennial bronze medals in them.
Take a look at my other hobby ... http://www.jk-dk.art
CCF Master Historian of USA Commemoratives
Learn More...
commems's Avatar
United States
12252 Posts
 Posted 06/30/2025  07:13 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add commems to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
Why do you suppose that is? The open-ended nature of them?

I believe two main factors are in play:

1) Congress had already authorized ARBA medals - President Richard M. Nixon had signed the Bicentennial medals bill into law on February 15, 1972 - and this Act had enabled the striking of ARBA gold medals by the Mint. Authorizing ARBA gold coins would have been something of a "double dip."

2) The US Treasury was not yet supporting the striking of gold coins - the stance would see changes in the 1980s.



Collecting history one coin or medal at a time! (c) commems. All rights reserved.
Moderator
Learn More...
jbuck's Avatar
United States
187582 Posts
CCF Master Historian of USA Commemoratives
Learn More...
commems's Avatar
United States
12252 Posts
 Posted 04/18/2026  07:19 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add commems to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
ADDENDUM

While I'm in a US Bicentennial frame of mind, I thought I would add a bit more context for my "the US Treasury was not yet supporting the striking of gold coins" comment (above).

In September 1975, a coin and medal Hearing was held by the House Subcommittee on Historic Preservation and Coinage, under the House Committee on Banking, Currency and Housing. The Hearing reviewed approximately two dozen coin and medal proposals that had been introduced in the House. Among them, multiple of the pending Bicentennial Gold coin bills.

Mary Brooks, Director of the US Mint, testified at the Hearing and offered the following in regards to the proposed Bicentennial Gold coins:

"The Department opposes the issuance of commemorative gold coins. The domestic monetary role of gold was terminated when the United States left the gold standard by a series of actions taken in 1983 and 1934. In addition. it has long been the policy objective of the United States to diminish the internal monetary role of gold, the international monetary role of gold, an objective substantially advanced by agreements a few weeks ago at the IMF meeting here in Washington

"Admittedly, the bills before this subcommittee contemplate that the gold coins would be commemorative only. However, since these gold coins would be legal tender and would constitute a part of our currency system, the Department is concerned that their issuance could well be interpreted abroad as being inconsistent with the position the United States took, that the special status and monetary role of gold should be eliminated.

"Apart from these policy objections, the Department has serious reservations whether, as a practical matter, we could produce a gold coin of a size and quality that would appropriately commemorate thc American Revolution and at the same time could be issued within the price of the average American citizen. On the basis of the current gold price of approximately $140 per ounce, a gold coin in the size of a half dollar would have to be sold for over $100 and would thus be within the means of relatively few of our citizens. That is not right -- $88 worth of gold.

"On the other hand. the coin minted and sold at prices the average American could afford would either contain a negligible amount of gold or would be very small and unimpressive as a commemorative piece to our Bicentennial."


Not much ambiguity in Director Brooks' statements/the Treasury Department's viewpoint!




Collecting history one coin or medal at a time! (c) commems. All rights reserved.
Moderator
Learn More...
jbuck's Avatar
United States
187582 Posts
Moderator
Learn More...
Dearborn's Avatar
United States
94728 Posts
Moderator
Learn More...
nickelsearcher's Avatar
United States
15388 Posts
 Posted 04/22/2026  06:59 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add nickelsearcher to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Very informative addendum - thank you for sharing.

I believe Director Brooks remarks were spot on. The following caught my eye:


Quote:
On the basis of the current gold price of approximately $140 per ounce, a gold coin in the size of a half dollar would have to be sold for over $100 and would thus be within the means of relatively few of our citizens.


Just imagine the strength of her 'affordability' argument at today's gold spot prices.
Take a look at my other hobby ... http://www.jk-dk.art
Moderator
Learn More...
jbuck's Avatar
United States
187582 Posts
 Posted 04/22/2026  11:20 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add jbuck to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
Just imagine the strength of her 'affordability' argument at today's gold spot prices.
Indeed.
  Previous TopicReplies: 9 / Views: 741Next Topic  

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.



    




Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Contact Us  |  Advertise Here  |  Privacy Policy / Terms of Use

Coin Community Forum © 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Forums
It took 0.36 seconds to rattle this change. Forums