Proposed reverse for the 2015 Ultra High Relief gold coin
This afternoon, the Citizens Coin Advisory Committee approved a proposal by the U.S. Mint to produce an ultra-high relief or just a high relief gold coin whose design has not been determined. The coin will comply with all applicable design laws but the obverse will be a more modern interpretation of liberty and the reverse inspired by previous submissions to the committee. The CCAC recommended that the planchet be similar to that of the one-ounce gold coins and not smaller like the 2009 coin.
Along with the gold coin will be a companion silver coin struck on the one-ounce planchet that is used for the American Silver Eagle. Although it was not specifically addressed, it is assumed that silver coin will be of the same or similar relief of the gold coin.
This afternoon I was able to break away from my daily activities to attend the CCAC meeting via conference call. This is the first time I attended one of their meetings and came away a little surprised and a little appalled.
What surprised me with the meeting is how in lock-step the committee is on everything. There appears to be no disagreement or questioning of what the U.S. Mint had proposed. Granted the committee members may have history with the issues beyond this meeting, but I was surprised that alternatives were not recommended or discussed.
The committee was excited because the proposal was somewhat in alignment with a motion they passed last April to create a Liberty Medal series. According to Gary Marks, chairman of the CCAC, the Liberty Medal Series would be an arts medal produced by the U.S. Mint to foster new design and innovation. It is to encourage the artists to have artistic impression beyond what they are allowed to do as part of the coin programs.
I do not know if it was previously discussed but according to the authorizing law for the American Silver Eagle bullion program (31 U.S.C. § 5112(e)(3)) the coins must have a design “symbolic of Liberty on the obverse side” and “of an eagle on the reverse side.” The law does not say that the obverse must be Adolph Weinman’s Walking Liberty design and it does not say that the reverse must be a heraldic eagle. Why has the committee not considered using the existing American Silver Eagle program to create a Liberty design program?
In discussing the overall medallic arts program, the CCAC decided to create a study group to come up with a plan to recommend to the U.S. Mint. Aside from the “American Liberty Silver Medal Program,” as described by Marks, he also proposed Freestyle Medal of an American theme. This would be one medal per year that would be artistic representations.
CCAC Member Heidi Wastweet said that the arts medal will allow for experimenting; allow the artist and designers to “expanding our wings” for future projects. As a result, it will let future stakeholders know what is possible so that it would inspire better designs.
While a medals program is a good idea, what seems to be missing is the subject matter. If the Liberty design can be leverage through the American Eagle bullion program, why not have medals used to honor history? Why is it when nations around the world issued commemorative coins honoring D-Day, the United States, whose mint is overly regulated by intransigent politicians, did not issue any commemorative item on the 70th anniversary of an event that changed world history?
Expanding the medals program in this manner would be the perfect way to honor history when congress has failed to remember they represent a country rather their owners… I mean donors!
Where I was appalled was what I saw as over-the-top cult-like patriotic gushing by some of the members over the proceedings. I thought the CCAC was supposed to be an oversight organization; at least that is how it appears to be described in the authorizing law (31 U.S. Code § 5135). There should not be a problem with supporting the work of the U.S. Mint and support the artists whom everyone agrees should be treated better. However, there were some comments that sounded more like members were wrapping themselves in the flag rather than working on an oversight committee.
As part of his closing remarks, Chairman Marks said, “I believe that this is the single most impactful idea that the Mint can pursue at this point in time in the United States.” Unfortunately, I wish this was the case. It appears to be another missed opportunity by the CCAC similar to previous missed opportunities by this committee.
I will have more commentary in the coming days.
Background from the U.S. Mint
Potential Products
2015 24-karat Gold Ultra High Relief Coin 2015 Silver Medal
Background
As a result of the success and popularity of the 2009 Ultra High Relief Double Eagle Gold Coin, the United States Mint (Mint) is considering producing a 2015 24-karat Gold Ultra High Relief (UHR) Coin.
The CCAC recommended a new eagle design for the reverse of the American Eagle Silver One Ounce Coin, a change the Mint is not pursuing, opting instead to consider showcasing the beauty and intricacies of the recommended design on a 2015 24k Gold UHR Coin.
To compliment such a reverse, the Mint would consider featuring a new, modern rendition of Liberty on the obverse of the 2015 24k Gold UHR Coin.
If developed, a 2015 24k Gold UHR Coin would be comparable to the 2009 Ultra High Relief Double Eagle Gold Coin, in that it would also be one troy ounce. The denomination would also have to be determined.
To make such a design accessible to various ranges of collectors, the Mint is considering the possibility of producing a medal, struck in silver, bearing the same design as a 2015 24k Gold UHR Coin. Striking these medals in silver would provide an additional opportunity to showcase the intricacy of the design features and the beauty of the artwork.
If this concept is pursued, the United States Mint would seek Secretary of the Treasury approval to strike this gold coin under authority of 31 U.S.C. § 5112(i)(4)(C).
If this concept is pursued, the United States Mint would seek Secretary of the Treasury approval to strike this silver medal under authority of 31 U.S.C. § 5111 (a)(2).
Design History
In 2009, the United States Mint fulfilled the original vision of Augustus Saint-Gaudens with the release of the 2009 Ultra High Relief Double Eagle Gold Coin; closing one chapter of American coin design and beginning a new one.
If produced, 2015 24k Gold UHR Coins could be viewed as a follow up to the 2009 Double Eagle UHR, contrasting classic American coin design with modern American coin design.
U.S. Mint mock-up of the 24 karat gold 50th anniversary Kennedy half dollar
Those waiting for the U.S. Mint to release the Kennedy Half-Dollar coin 50th Anniversary Products will be happy to learn that the U.S. Mint announced the products that will be available.
The coin that seems to be the most anticipated is the 50th Anniversary Kennedy Half-Dollar Gold Proof Coin (U.S. Mint product code K15) that will be struct at the West Point facility using three-quarters of a troy ounce of .9999 fine, 24-karat gold. The dual-dated coin will be encapsulated and issued in a wood box, probably similar to the wood boxes used for past special issue gold coins starting with the 2009 Ultra High Relief Gold Coin.
Sales of the gold coin will begin on August 5, 2014 at noon Eastern Daylight Time through the U.S. Mint’s online catalog or by phone. They will also sell the coin at the 2014 Chicago World’s Fair of Money in Rosemont. The price will be set based on the prevailing price of gold when the sale begins. If you want to anticipate the costs, you can see the U.S. Mint 2014 Pricing of Numismatic and Commemorative Gold and Platinum Products. [PDF]
Fans of silver coins and the variations on the silver design will have to wait until the Fall for the release of the 50th Anniversary Kennedy Half-Dollar Silver Coin Collection. The four coin set will include 90-percent silver coins from each of the U.S. Mint’s facilities in four different styles:
One reverse proof coin from West Point
One proof coin from Philadelphia
One enhanced uncirculated coin from San Francisco, and
One uncirculated coin from Denver.
The press release says that the “encapsulated coins are secured in coin wells within an embossed leatherette-type folder that includes the same image of John F. Kennedy that appears on the coins in this set, with patriotic imagery of stars and stripes.” Since this sounds like a new packaging style, we may have to wait until the set is released to truly understand the presentation.
Finally, for the budget conscious, the 50th Anniversary Kennedy Half-Dollar Uncirculated Coin Set will feature two uncirculated half-dollars from Philadelphia and Denver in a commemorative folder. Although the set will go on sale on July 24, 2014, the U.S. Mint has created a catalog page for the set.
50th Anniversary Kennedy Half-Dollar Uncirculated Coin Set
Are you going to buy any of the 50th Anniversary Kennedy Half-Dollar tribute coins?
Yes, I am buying all three sets! (30%, 40 Votes)
Yes, I am buying the silver coin set only. (24%, 32 Votes)
No, I am just not interested. (16%, 21 Votes)
Yes, I am buying the gold coin and silver coin set. (14%, 18 Votes)
Yes, I am buying the gold coin only. (13%, 17 Votes)
Yes, I am buying the uncirculated set only. (3%, 4 Votes)
U.S. Mint mock-up of the 24 karat gold 50th anniversary Kennedy half dollar
Recent events have caused the amateurs to come out of the woodwork to decry that the U.S. Mint is doing something illegal. While the U.S. Mint is an agency run by fallible humans, they are less prone to issues as seen in other bureaus within the Department of the Treasury. However, understanding what the U.S. Mint can or cannot do is a matter of understanding the law.
It has been an ongoing theme written on this blog, the latest was about the nonsensical $1 Trillion coin, is that all you have to do to understand what the U.S. Mint can and cannot do is clearly documented in Title 31, Section 5112 of the United States Code (31 U.S.C. § 5112), Denominations, specifications, and design of coins.
You can read Section 5112 without having to obtain a law degree. It is very readable. It is the section that covers all of the specification for every coin struck by the Mint. It describes the size, weight, content, and the design of the coin. Very little is left up to the Mint in coinage design. But as the U.S. Mint is run by fallible humans, these laws were written by even more fallible humans: congress. This means that some of the laws are very clear while others are open to some interpretation.
First, it has been questioned whether the U.S. Mint can strike more 2014 National Baseball Hall of Fame commemorative coins since they sold out of the gold and silver coins. The answer to that question can be found in law (31 U.S.C. § 5112(m)). This is the section that describes the legal requirements for commemorative coins. Paragraph (2)(B) (31 U.S.C. § 5112(m)(2)(B)) says (emphasis mine):
If the Secretary determines, based on independent, market-based research conducted by a designated recipient organization of a commemorative coin program, that the mintage levels described in subparagraph (A) are not adequate to meet public demand for that commemorative coin, the Secretary may waive one or more of the requirements of subparagraph (A) with respect to that commemorative coin program.
2014 National Baseball Hall of Fame commemorative silver dollars and gold commemoratives are sold out at the U.S. Mint.
Since subparagraph (A) codifies the limits of commemorative programs, and if the mintage levels are not adequate to meet public demand, then the Secretary can authorize high limits for the commemorative coin program.
As was the case with the 2005 Marine Corps Commemorative Silver Dollar, a quick sellout of the coins does satisfy the evidence necessary for the Secretary to make the decision to increase the production limits. In 2005, then Secretary of the Treasury John W. Snow authorized the U.S. Mint to produce 100,000 additional silver dollars. This was the last commemorative program sellout prior to the Hall of Fame coins.
However, the proposal to increase the production of the National Baseball Hall of Fame coins is speculation. This rumor has not been acknowledged by the U.S. Mint or the Department of the Treasury.
The other claim is that it is illegal or questionable that the U.S. Mint can produce the 2014 Kennedy Half Dollar gold coin. In an op-ed printed in Coin World, William T. Gibbs wrote, “The Mint is using what it cites as existing authority to produce a .9999 fine gold half dollar struck at the West Point Mint, with a 1964–2014 dual date and the higher relief 1964 portrait. The logic behind this coin is hard to understand. We’ve never had a gold half dollar before and the Mint’s legal authority to issue it is open to debate.”
Equating the fact that the U.S. Mint has never produced a gold half dollar coin is a parochial discussion and not whether the U.S. Mint can legally produce the coin. After all, the U.S. Mint produces quarter dollars made of five ounces of silver.
Congress makes the laws and they can change at almost any time!
The U.S. Mint is allowed to mint the coin under the authority of 31 U.S.C. § 5112(q), the law that authorizes the Gold Buffalo bullion coin. According to the law, the U.S. Mint is only required to produce the coin with the James Earl Fraser Type 1 Buffalo design the first year. Any changes in subsequent years must then be vetted by the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee and U.S. Commission of Fine Arts.
The same questions were raised when the U.S. Mint issued the 2009 Ultra High Relief Double Eagle Gold Coin. The coin was based on the 1907 design by Augustus Saint-Gaudens was produced in .9999 fine gold and was issued under the Gold Bullion Coins provision of the law (31 U.S.C. § 5112(q)).
Gibbs further says, “When the Mint struck gold versions of the 2000 Sacagawea dollar and announced plans to sell them to the public, Congress stopped the Mint, stating that Mint officials lacked constitutional authority to issue the dollar coin in gold” as an additional argument against the U.S. Mint producing the Kennedy gold coin. In 2000, the law authorizing the U.S. Mint to strike 24-karat coins did not exit. The Buffalo Gold Bullion coin program that the decision is based was signed into law on December 22, 2005 as part of the Presidential $1 Coin Act of 2005 (Public Law 109–145 [PDF]).
The U.S. Mint may not be the most perfect agency and you may not like their decisions, but to accuse them of questionable legal practices is a bit naive.
This will be the third time that the U.S. Mint has launched a gold coin at a coin show. Last year, the U.S. Mint sold out of the 2013 Reverse Proof 24-karat Gold Buffalo coin at the World’s Fair of Money. They received a secondary shipment which also sold out. Similarly, the National Baseball Hall of Fame commemorative was sold at the Whitman Coin and Currency Expo this past March. It also sold out even after receiving a secondary shipment.
Although past performance does not guarantee future results, there is significant anecdotal evidence that the Kennedy gold coin will also sell very well.
So let’s see what you think. Will you buy this coin?
Are you going to buy the 2014 Gold John F Kennedy Half Dollar tribute coin?
Yes, I will buy the gold, silver, and clad set if it is offered (29%, 19 Votes)
Yes, I will buy the gold coin. (25%, 16 Votes)
No, a gold coin would be too expensive (25%, 16 Votes)
No, I'm not interested (20%, 13 Votes)
I don't buy any coins from the U.S. Mint (2%, 1 Votes)
Total Voters: 65
Loading ...
For those who cannot afford gold, the U.S. Mint is planning on producing silver coins with just the 2014 date. The set will feature coins from all four branch mints and include a proof coin struck in Philadelphia, a reverse proof produced in West Point, an enhanced uncirculated from San Francisco, and an uncirculated coin minted in Denver.
Although the U.S. Mint has not announced the price of these coins, they plan to place order limits to prevent the situation that happened with the National Baseball Hall of Fame commemorative coin that appears to have been bought out by dealers.
As part of the design process, Frank Gasparro sculpted different variations of the presidential eagle in plaster.
U.S. cents have been made of copper, steel, and copper plated zinc. What’s next?
If you have not provided your opinion to the U.S. Mint about their study of alternative metals for circulating coins, the time to provide comments have been extended. According to the Federal Register (79 F.R. 32363 [PDF]), the National Armored Carriers Association (NACA) requested an extension stating that additional time is necessary to provide an appropriate and comprehensive response. The U.S. Mint agreed with the NACA and has extended the comment period until the close of business on Tuesday, June 24, 2014.
Even though the U.S. Mind does not define who its stakeholders are, I believe that collects are part of the stakeholder community and should be heard. If you do comment, the U.S. Mint is looking for input on the following factors:
Costs to convert to circulating coins composed of alternative metals given the following possible changes to coins:
Weight
Electromagnetic signature
Visual changes, such as color and relief
Transition time needed to introduce a circulating coin composed of an alternative metal.
Comments on how best to inform and educate both affected industries and the public on changes to circulating coins.
Environmental impact from the use of circulating coins composed of alternative metals.
Other issues of importance not identified above.
When commenting, note that the U.S. Mint said it is not considering aluminum alloy metals.
Comments may be sent by email to Coin.StakeholdersResponse@usmint.treas.gov. If you prefer to send your comments the traditional way, mail them to Coin Stakeholders Response, Office of Coin Studies, United States Mint, 801 9th Street NW., Washington, DC 20220.
If you do comment and would like to share what you said with the rest of the community, either send it to me via email or post it as a comment below.
Note that the likelihood of these bills passing is slim-to-none and Slim just left town. Since Sen. Rockefeller is retiring after this session, there is a small chance that Mother’s Day commemorative could be voted on by unanimous consent in December as a legislative “going away present.”
Decoration Day was first celebrated by Freedmen, freed southern slaves, May 1, 1865 in Charleston, South Carolina to honor the service of the 257 Union soldiers buried at the Washington Race Course. Today, Washington Race Course is known as Hampton Park.
The next year, southern states began their own Memorial Days to honor their soldiers who died during the war. No specific date was used but occurred in late April through June. By 1880, there was a more organized Confederate Memorial Day. These celebrations honored specific soldiers to commemorate the Confederate “Lost Cause.” By 1913, a sense of nationalism saw a commemoration of all soldiers that have died in battle.
In the north, the fraternal organization of Civil War veterans The Grand Army of the Republic began organizing “Decoration Day” in 1868. Decoration Day was to honor the fallen by decorating the graves of Union soldiers with flowers and flags. Ceremonies included speeches that were a mix of religion, nationalism, and a rehash of history in vitriolic terms against the Southern soldiers. The acrimony against the South began to subside by the end of the 1870s.
Memorial Day did not take on national significances until after World War I. Rather than being a holiday to remember those of died in service during the Civil War, the nation began to recognize all those who gave the ultimate sacrifice during all conflicts. By the end of World War II, most of the celebrations were renamed from Decoration Day to Memorial Day. Memorial Day did not become an official holiday until 1967 and its date changed from the traditional May 30 to the last Monday of the month by the Uniform Holidays Act (Public Law 90-363, 5 U.S.C. § 6103(a)) in 1968.
Regardless of how you view the current world conflicts, the men and women who serve in our military deserve the honor and respect for their service. Pray for their ability to safely return home.
U.S. cents have been made of copper, steel, and copper plated zinc. What’s next?
As part of its ongoing study of alternative medals to be used for coinage mandated by the Coin Modernization, Oversight, and Continuity Act of 2010, (Public Law 111-302 [PDF]), the U.S. Mint is seeking comment from “ stakeholders” as to the impact expected if congress was to approve a change in coinage metals. The Request for Comment (RFC) was published in the Federal Register (79 F.R. 19971 [PDF]) asking for stakeholders to provide more input to its ongoing research effort.
Although the U.S. Mint does not define who they consider stakeholders but does mention the “coin industry” in one paragraph, the guideline questions are clearly targeted to the coin-operated machine industry. Coin-op machines are more than the soda and candy machines that may be in the break room where you work. These machines include toll booth machines, machines that produce bus and/or train fare cards, parking meters, game machines, and even the few pay telephones that are still in use. Everything that accepts coins will have to be replaced, repaired, adjusted, or scrapped should there be a change in coinage metals.
The new technology used by the Royal Canadian Mint to protect the Toonie (C$2)
The trouble that the United States is in for can be seen just across the border in Canada. Although the Royal Canadian Mint produced test tokens that anyone could have used to verify and adjust their systems two years prior to the introduction of the new Loonie (C$1) and Toonie (C$2) coins, Canadian news followed the trials and tribulations of many communities whose parking meters and other parking-related systems would not accept the new coins.
In the United Kingdom, the Bank of England and law enforcement is engaged in a difficult fight against counterfeit £1 coins. Sources estimate that between 3-percent of the £1 coins in circulation are fake amounting to more than 45 million counterfeit coins. These fakes are so convincing and very well constructed that they can be successfully used in vending machines for payment including in London’s Underground. In an attempt to stem the problem, the Royal Mint has designed a new £1 coin to be circulated by 2017 in hopes to cut the counterfeiting rate.
New edge view of the coin the Royal Mint hopes will be able to thwart counterfeiters.
Changes in the Loonie and Toonie were subtle as compared to the changes in the £1 coin. While the size of the coin will remain about the same, it will go from being round to have 12 sides. Rather than it being make of one metal, the new coin will be bi-metallic with a yellow metal on the outer ring and a silver-colored inner core. Rather than the edge being milled with a single incuse inscription, the edge will have alternating milling and the year in Roman numerals on each of the sides.
The coin-operated businesses in Britain are beginning to complain about the changes even though they are being given nearly three years to adjust. For their systems, the new coins will have a different weight, specific gravity, and the electromagnetic signature will differ from the current coin. Every system from the Underground to parking systems to food and beverage vending machines will have to be upgraded to accept the new coins. One report estimates that it will cost up to £50 million (approximately $82.3 million) just to update parking systems.
The Automatic Vending Association, the U.K.’s vending industry trade group, estimates that the new coin will costs its members over £100 million ($168.5 million) to convert their machines.
Expect the costs in the United States to be much higher mainly because of scale. The National Automatic Merchandising Association (NAMA), the $45 billion per year vending industry trade association in the United States, has already issued a report saying that it will cost from $100 to $500 per machine to convert them to accept new coinage.
The American Amusement Machine Association (AAMA) has come out against any change in U.S. coinage. It was reported that AAMA president John Schultz said to leave the coinage alone “because it works, rather than risk the costly consequences.” AAMA has not provided an estimate for those costly consequences.
The last significant change in coinage composition was in 2000 on the introduction of the Sacagawea “Golden” dollar coin. Following the debacle of the Susan B. Anthony small dollar coin that was mistaken for a quarter, the coin was redesigned without a reeded edge and given a golden color by adding manganese to the metals mix. Although this change primarily impacted the gaming industry that relied on the dollar coin, the vending machine industry did respond by converting old machines and manufacturing new ones that accepted the new coin.
The change to copper-coated zinc cents created a seven coin set for 1982
Previously, the one cent coin went from being made of 95-percent copper and the rest zinc to being made of 98.5-percent zinc with a copper coating. Not only did this change occur in the middle of 1982, but it created seven collectible varieties of coins that are not that expensive to own. Although this change did not affect many industries, new automated cash registers being used primarily at grocery and home improvement stores can accept both the copper and zinc coins without problems.
Any discussion of coin composition changes has to include the change from silver to clad coinage. When President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Coinage Act of 1965 (Pub. L. 89-81) into law on July 23, 1965, the composition of the dime and quarter dollar was change from 90-percent silver and 10-copper to 75-percent copper and 25-percent nickel bonded to a core of pure copper. This mix of metals was selected so that the coins would have an electromagnetic signature that was very similar to their silver counterparts. The half-dollar was reduced to 40-percent silver surrounding a pure copper core.
This change in coinage was done for the same reason that congress has asked the U.S. Mint to study alternative metals: the cost of materials and labor to make the coins is higher than the face value of the coin. As of the Fiscal Year 2013 (October 2012-September 2013) Annual Report, it costs the U.S. Mint 1.83 cents in labor and materials to manufacture the one cent coin and 9.41 cents for the five cents coin.
As a comparison, the cost for the dime including labor and materials is 4.56 cents per coin while the quarter dollar costs 10.5 cents to make.
1853 Braided Hair Half Cent Obverse – The last lowest denomination coin eliminated by the congress.
Deciding what to do about U.S. coinage goes beyond the accounting details. A change by the federal government will impact everyone domestically and those overseas that use the dollar as their currency. There will be quite a few collateral issues including economic, political, and philosophical considerations. From a policy perspective, congress will have to think about the following before making any changes to our change:
Does the U.S. eliminate the one cent coin?
Does the U.S. eliminate the one dollar note in favor of a coin?
If a transition to new metals is approved, does the government provide economic assistance to small businesses and sectors that will feel a bigger impact from this change?
Will the federal government provide assistance to communities to help convert municipal services to be able to take the new coins?
Should the U.S. Mint, a government agency, be allowed and/or required to earn a profit from its operations?
How will the people be educated on the new coinage?
Since the U.S. Mint did not define who their stakeholders are, it is fair to say that the stakeholders are all citizens of the United States. If you would like to comment, the U.S. Mint is looking for input on the following factors:
Costs to convert to circulating coins composed of alternative metals given the following possible changes to coins:
Weight
Electromagnetic signature
Visual changes, such as color and relief
Transition time needed to introduce a circulating coin composed of an alternative metal.
Comments on how best to inform and educate both affected industries and the public on changes to circulating coins.
Environmental impact from the use of circulating coins composed of alternative metals.
Other issues of importance not identified above.
When commenting, note that the U.S. Mint said it is not considering aluminum alloy metals.
Responses are due to the U.S. Mint 60-days following its printing in the Federal Register (April 10, 2014 making the due date June 9, 2014). Electronic comments can be sent to Coin.StakeholdersResponse@usmint.treas.gov. If you prefer to send your comments the traditional way, mail them to Coin Stakeholders Response, Office of Coin Studies, United States Mint, 801 9th Street NW., Washington, DC 20220.
If you do comment and would like to share what you said with the rest of the community, either send it to me via email or post it as a comment below.
Photo credits: All photographs are the author’s except the image of the Toonie from the Royal Canadian Mint and the One-pound coin prototype from the Royal Mint.
Our long national nightmare is over, congress finally passed some sort of numismatic-related legislation. But do not get too excited because today’s news out of the House of Representatives is only the beginning. Next is for the Senate to do nothing while the bill languishes in committee.
H.R. 627: National Park Service 100th Anniversary Commemorative Coin Act
Sponsor: Rep. Erik Paulsen (R-MN)
• To provide for the issuance of coins to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the establishment of the National Park Service.
• Passed the House of Representatives: April 29, 2014
• Received in the Senate on April 29, 2014 and referred to the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
Earlier this week I drove up north to Long Island to spend holidays with relatives. Taking these rides reminds me that we do not live forever. While the family has been expanded with children, the number of relatives at the seder is lower than it was just 10 years ago and these trips are punctuated with trips to the cemetery.
2014 coins found in change during a recent drive to New York
One advantage of making this trip is that I get to visit different establishments where paying cash returns change that can have some surprises. Sometimes, I take a close look at what the cashier returns to me. Other times, I just glance at the little metal disks to make sure that it is the correct amount before it is dropped in my pocket.
During one of our necessary stops, I was handed some change and noticed that the dimes looked a bit shinier than usual. Quickly zeroing in on the date I saw the “2014” date. After searching all over the Washington, D.C. area for 2014 coins, I find my first somewhere on the road in New Jersey.
Later that evening I emptied my pocket to see what else I could find. In addition to the dime, there was a 2014-P nickel and a surprise.
In 1979, the Susan B. Anthony dollar was released to much fanfare. It was the first “small” dollar coin and was the first U.S. coin to feature a real woman. Prior to the famed suffragette being featured on a coin, the image was that of Lady Liberty in some form. Even the Indian Head cent was not an Indian but Liberty in a native headdress.
But those of us who watch the experiment first hand soon discovered that the coin was too close in size with a quarter. In fact, the color, and reeded edges saw the Susie B. consistently being mistaken for quarters.
Almost as instantly as they appeared, the coins disappeared. Even as the public was willing to try the new coins, the rejection was almost as quick. After three years of production, the coins found a home in Las Vegas where they were used in slot machines. So many coins went unused following their last production in 1981 that was mainly for collectors, production picked up in 1999 after orders for additional coins were made from the vending machine and Las Vegas gaming industry.
The ’79 Susie B. that I received in change that was probably mistaken for a quarter.
Apparently, the mistakes of the past continue into 2014 since a 1979-P Susan B. Anthony dollar was mixed in with my change. Although some vending machines will provide change in dollar coins and could be loaded with Susie B. dollars, I did not use a machine.
I suspect that someone who previously visited that roadside oasis (how’s that for a description of a rest stop along the New Jersey Turnpike), used one of the vending machines, then spent the dollar thinking it was a quarter. The coin sat in the tray in the cash register until it was time to provide change for my purchase. The cashier, not paying attention to what she was doing, counted the requisite number of coins from the quarter section of the draw. In a rush, I just saw what was the right size coin and dropped it into my pocket on my way back out of the building.
Starting in 2000, the dollar was changed to not only honor Sacagawea but magnesium was added to the metal mix to give the coins a golden color. The color and making the edge smooth made it less possible that the coin would be mistaken for a quarter. Unfortunately, the memory of the failed Susie B. lingers among a significant segment of the population in a way that kept a similar push with the modern Presidential dollars from being successful.
But in this case, finding a Susan B. Anthony dollar made my day!
Loading ...
