Backlash to Tubman decision limited, isolated

The Treasury Department’s decision to replace President Andrew Jackson with abolitionist Harriet Tubman on the front of the $20 bill has sparked limited and isolated backlash.

Critics of the move, announced Wednesday, have been quick to praise Tubman and suggested she be put on a different bill, while defending Jackson’s prime position on the bill he’s occupied since 1928. 

{mosads}Some opponents of the change claimed Treasury’s decision to move Jackson to the back of the bill with Tubman on the front was driven by political correctness.

Jackson’s defenders praise him for being the nation’s first president to rise from poverty and pay off the young country’s Revolutionary War debt. But his cruel treatment of Native Americans, deep-seated hatred of paper currency, and ownership of a massive plantation and hundreds of slaves made him a long-standing target for activists opposed to him being on the $20 bill.

“Well, Andrew Jackson had a great history, and I think it’s very rough when you take somebody off the bill,” said Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump on the “Today” show Thursday morning. “I think Harriet Tubman is fantastic, but I would love to leave Andrew Jackson or see if we can maybe come up with another denomination.”

Fox News host Greta Van Susteren called Treasury’s decision “awful,” “dumb” and deliberately provocative. 

“It’s so easy to make everyone happy,” Van Susteren said Wednesday night. “We could use a $25 bill. Put her picture on that and we could all celebrate.

“That’s the smart and easy thing to do. But no, some people don’t think and would gratuitously stir up conflict in the nation,” she said.

Former Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson also suggested putting Tubman on a different bill: the $2 note, which is exceedingly rare but still in circulation.

Reactions from lawmakers were almost universally positive and Democratic, but members of Tennessee’s congressional delegation took issue with what they perceived as a slight to Jackson.

“United States history is not Andrew Jackson versus Harriet Tubman. It is Andrew Jackson and Harriet Tubman, both heroes of a nation’s work in progress toward great goals,” said Sen. Lamar Alexander (R) in a Wednesday statement.  

“It is unnecessary to diminish Jackson in order to honor Tubman. Jackson was the first common man to be elected president. He fought to save the Union. He defined an American era. He helped found the Democratic Party. And he was a great Tennessean,” Alexander said.

His Tennessee colleague Sen. Bob Corker (R) added, “While I support finding new ways to pay tribute to the many deserving women throughout American history, I would hope we could do so without diminishing the legacy of others.”

.Rep. Diane Black (R) said Wednesday that Treasury “should look at the history of what [Jackson] did for our country, and I wish that they would reconsider their actions.” 

Rep. Scott DesJarlais (R) also defended Jackson’s record to The Hill on Thursday.

“Certainly Harriet Tubman is a great choice, great American. But I would be opposed to changing the 20,” he said.

Even Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen appeared torn Wednesday when praising Tubman.

“I understand the reason why they’d do that,” he said. “Harriet Tubman was a great woman, and it’s appropriate that we recognize women on our currency.”

Tubman did receive unqualified praise from one Republican: presidential candidate and Ohio Gov. John Kasich.

“She wasn’t some big shot. She became a big shot because of what she did,” Kasich said Thursday while campaigning in Pennsylvania, according to Politico. “She started a movement. She drove change from the bottom up.”

Updated at 5:26 p.m.