| Author |
Replies: 13 / Views: 1,668 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1613 Posts |
I've been doing some very exhaustive research in trying to contact U.S. Mint Director, David J. Ryder. In today's world of communication one would think it easy to connect with another in an instant. Not so trying to locate his email. Anyhow, the reason behind my difficult quest brought me here to pose a question tied to an explanation for the task at hand. I'm looking to ask him if the coinage act of 1890 still applies. Pursuant to the act, the director can bypass Congress and redesign our coinage after a twenty-five year period. I think 112 years is enough, wouldn't you agree? For the moment I'll continue on, hoping for suggestions and thoughts from the forum. In the meantime....  ANA member - PAN Member - BCCS Member There are no problems only solutions - the late, great John Lennon
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
You're going to just have to contact someone way lower down and would likely have better luck with your congressional representatives office. Or the much easier thing would be to contact something like Coin World Director and high level government employees don't publish a direct line to them or they would be getting bombarded all day and night by people. Whether or not it still applies the chances that he comes out and says I'm redesigning everything is slim to none and slim has left town. Also be careful what you wish for, the new nickel and penny aren't exactly stunning and frankly the old versions were better especially for the nickel
Edited by basebal21 02/23/2019 3:27 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2023 Posts |
That law appears to still be on the books: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/5112Quote: ...The Secretary may, after consulting with the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee and the Commission of Fine Arts, adopt and prepare new designs or models of emblems or devices that are authorized in the same way as when new coins or devices are authorized. The Secretary may change the design or die of a coin only once within 25 years of the first adoption of the design, model, hub, or die for that coin. The Secretary may procure services under section 3109 of title 5 in carrying out this paragraph. That link appears to have all of the text regarding coins and designs (including older programs like the State Quarters and first spouse bullion). The header is "U.S. Code > Title 31. MONEY AND FINANCE > Subtitle IV. MONEY > Chapter 51. COINS AND CURRENCY > Subchapter II. GENERAL AUTHORITY > Section 5112. Denominations, specifications, and design of coins" Edited to correct typos. Edited further to add: If you really want to contact him and have LinkedIn Premium, he has a page there -- but this is a legal question and it was easy to look up the text. That said, being legally possible and actually happening are entirely different things.
Edited by Alpha2814 02/23/2019 3:36 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
Sort of like trying to contact Superman or Batman. For all you know there is no such person. Only a figure head with that name and/or title. Imagine if you were at the top of some organization where millions of people want to get in touch with you. What would YOU do if you received about 100,000 emails or phone calls each day. And the worst of it is how many of them just want to say nothing of any value, just mumbling. If I had to publicize my email or phone number I'd so like girls do in high school and give out the number for the zoo.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
587 Posts |
If you're looking for a legal question, you're better looking for a legal department contact. The top dogs would just ask them anyway, and likely forward you there. But since you're the public, media relations may be easier. Quote: That law appears to still be on the books But is it superceded by anything else? Like a law mandating Lincoln's profile, or some such.
Edited by bzookaj 02/23/2019 6:48 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2023 Posts |
Quote: But is it superceded by anything else? Like a law mandating Lincoln's profile, or some such. I'm not a lawyer, but my recollection is that legislation that affects written code like this actually changes the code that we would see here -- we wouldn't see the legislation that was passed, only the impact on the code. (Legislation usually says things like "this amends the Code to strike this clause or include this sentence".) It's interesting that the code at the link I provided mandates Jefferson and Monticello on the nickel but says nothing about Lincoln or Roosevelt. So I did a little digging for Roosevelt. Wikipedia notes only a bill filed by James Hobson Morrison to put Roosevelt on the dime, but I couldn't find any written legislation mandating the design. Wikipedia does note that "As the Mercury design, first coined in 1916, had been struck for at least 25 years, it could be changed under the law by the Bureau of the Mint. No congressional action was required, though the committees of each house with jurisdiction over the coinage were informed." More on this can be found in this reference from Google Books, quoting Morrison: Quote:As a result of introducing this bill, I have received widespread favorable comment, emanating from all sections of the United States and even from foreign countries, in regard to this measure. I am very happy to have been informed by the Honorable Henry Morgenthau, Jr. Secretary of the Treasury, that plans have been formulated by the Treasury to prepare a striking 10 cent piece bearing the likeness of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and to release the first consignment of the new issue at the beginning of 1946. This also met with the approval of Bureau of the Budget. Some time ago the fact was brought to my attention that the presently circulated Mercury dime has more than completed its 25-year span of usage, as it was adopted in 1916. While this is one of our most beautiful coins, I feel confident that my able colleagues, as well as the millions of Americans who share my keen admiration for our late President, will agree that it should be properly replaced in tribute to one of our greatest leaders in all history. So I'm guessing that's how it was done -- Roosevelt's design was not legislatively mandated, which is why it doesn't appear in the code. Being more than 25 years old, they could change it again with or without more legislation. Edit to add: Further complicating what I thought I knew... the Kennedy design was legislatively mandated by Public Law 88-256, basically saying Kennedy on the obverse and "an appropriate design to be prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury" on the reverse -- but this is not explicit in the Code I linked. So there could be things related to the Code that don't appear here. But anything superceding would, I still presume, would overwrite the code rather than be extraneous to it.
Edited by Alpha2814 02/23/2019 10:11 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1613 Posts |
Thanks all. The wealth of knowledge posted is truly priceless. As far as the mentioned U.S. code I briefly scanned through it a few weeks ago. Also, as per the "careful what you wish for" in a redesign, I agree with your consensus. They are a bit bland aren't they? Further, I realize a direct contact is highly unlike, I am hoping for a low level staff employee perhaps. However, I'd like to suggest something more traditional, more emblematic of who we are as a nation by getting away from portraits of past Presidents/notable people. I for one would love to see what our mint sculptors could come up with. Many of the commemoratives and medals give us a glimpes of what might be.
The reason behind my madness on the issue stems from a love of history. In this case, when Theodore Roosevelt in late 1904 penned then Treasury Secretary Leslie Mortier Shaw asking that Augustus Saint-Gaudens design new coinage (which was accomplished under the Coinage Act of 1890). The result is arguably the most beautiful design ever of a United States coin. History has a way of repeating it's self and my hope would be that I am able to witness it first hand.
ANA member - PAN Member - BCCS Member There are no problems only solutions - the late, great John Lennon
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote: However, I'd like to suggest something more traditional, more emblematic of who we are as a nation by getting away from portraits of past Presidents/notable people. I for one would love to see what our mint sculptors could come up with. Many of the commemoratives and medals give us a glimpes of what might be.
Which is exactly why I said be careful what you wish for.  In all seriousness the Presidents won't be going anywhere from the coins even if there was a redesign. The design committees would just end up ruining any good designs or not picking them and politicians would be falling over themselves to try and make social statements with the designs. By the time if was all done we'd all be wishing they just stayed the same and the ultra modern business strike market would be a ghost town
|
|
Moderator
 United States
188556 Posts |
That sounds really pessimistic, basebal21, but you are likely correct.  As much as I would love to see Liberty come back, it will probably never happen. And if they did give the dime a much needed refresh it would only end up for the worse. I say keep FDR and the torch as is. 
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
You are trying to contact the wrong person. The Act of 1890 gave the Secretary of the Treasury NOT the Director of the Mint the power to change the designs after 25 years without going through Congress. And yes it is still operative. Our best chance for something like that was when Lloyd Benson was Secretary. At that time all of the coins were eligible for changing and when Benson retired a Secretary he was also retiring from public life. He could have ordered the change and then retired and not had to answer to anyone for the decision. Quote: It's interesting that the code at the link I provided mandates Jefferson and Monticello on the nickel but says nothing about Lincoln or Roosevelt. That was because when the Bicentennial of the Louisiana Purchase nickels were approved the Senators and Representatives of Virginia raised a stink and inssited on the provision that mandated a return of Monticello to the reverse permanently. I would believe in that case that would supersede the Act of 1890, it would require new legislation removing that permanent mandate first.
Edited by Conder101 02/25/2019 11:51 am
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote: As much as I would love to see Liberty come back, it will probably never happen. And if they did give the dime a much needed refresh it would only end up for the worse. I say keep FDR and the torch as is. I think there could be a day where we see her come back even f only for one denomination, but the climate we are in today would have to change drastically in the future for the timing to be right to attempt it or possibly some major event would have to happen. I think it's far more likely to go the social issue route than a return to the past. I wouldn't mind at least seeing new dime designs given how bland the reverse is. Even the Merc reverse was pretty bland in my opinion. I know they're small but plenty of small coins around the world have much more catching designs. Again though I won't be holding my breath. I don't see anything actually changing. There's just no desire too or maybe not even the creativity. People would have gone nuts for a Kennedy with a space reverse as a one year change but they blew that chance too
|
|
Moderator
 United States
188556 Posts |
Quote: I think there could be a day where we see her come back even f only for one denomination, but the climate we are in today would have to change drastically in the future for the timing to be right to attempt it or possibly some major event would have to happen. Exactly and I am increasingly pessimistic about that, at least it happening before coins (if not all cash) become extinct.  Quote: I wouldn't mind at least seeing new dime designs given how bland the reverse is. Do no get me wrong, I welcome a tasteful and appropriate change. However, back to what you said earlier, be careful what we wish for. 
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote: Do no get me wrong, I welcome a tasteful and appropriate change. However, back to what you said earlier, be careful what we wish for. Absolutely, but in the case of the reverse of the dime I already hate it so the worst that could happen is I still just hate it 
|
|
Moderator
 United States
188556 Posts |
Quote: Absolutely, but in the case of the reverse of the dime I already hate it so the worst that could happen is I still just hate it Touche. 
|
| |
Replies: 13 / Views: 1,668 |
|