Robert Burns wrote in his poem To A Mouse “The best laid schemes of mice and men/Go often awry” describes how I tried to leave early yet something always gets in the way. Such was my journey this morning when I tried to leave before my morning note posted. But after a stop at a local coffee shop, I was able to take to the road to Philadelphia.
With traffic, the drive to Philadelphia was 2 hours and 45 minutes with a stop to refill the coffee cup. I made such good time that I was too early to check in. So I left my luggage with the concierge and walked across the street to the Pennsylvania Convention Center.
I know I should not compare facilities because each city builds a convention center for its own purposes, but it seems that this facility was not as big as I thought it would be. Maybe I am not seeing the entire facility. But it is a nice place. It is well laid out, decently lit in the bourse area, and nicely positioned in downtown Philadelphia.
Every city has its charm, especially the old cities in the northeast corridor. Their growth, problems, and gentrification reflect the character of the city and how the city wants to show itself. Philadelphia seems to want to balance between the history of the colonial city while maintaining its melting pot atmosphere. The problem is that Philadelphia was so successful that it has made supporting services, such as hotels and parking, more expensive.
While I am not a fan of the American Numismatic Association’s decision to hold the World’s Fair of Money in the suburbs of Chicago, I am not sure they could sustain other shows in the downtowns of major cities. While I like Philadelphia, costs and the economy suggest a more cost effective location.
Maybe it is the cost and the economy why I was a little disappointed when I entered the bourse area of the World’s Fair of Money. Maybe the halls are bigger than they seem, but the show does not take up the entire hall. The back area is very open and there are sections blocked off so the show does not take up the entire hall.
The last time I attended the World’s Fair of Money was the 2008 show in Baltimore where they took up three halls in the Baltimore Convention Center and had a waiting list. While I have missed a few since (should have had my hip replaced sooner!), the differences are drastic.
Regardless of the size, the one thing you have to give to the ANA is that they know how to put on a show! The schedule is packed with interesting lectures, meetings, and other activities. They get the U.S. Mint, Bureau of Engraving and Printing, and a few world mints here including the Royal Canadian Mint, Perth Mint, Holy Land Mint, and the Polish Mint—which are only the ones I saw today. I think there are others I will explore tomorrow.
When I arrived, I did make a dash to the U.S. Mint and BEP areas. At the U.S. Mint I was able to purchase the 2012 Making American History Coin and Currency Set, saving the $4.95 shipping costs. The set includes a 2012-S Proof American Silver Eagle and a Series 2009 $5 Federal Reserve Note from the Federal Reserve Bank Branch of San Francisco with the serial number beginning with “150.” The set looks like the U.S. Mint used the same supplier for this packaging as they have for other products. I like the set and glad I bought it.
At the BEP area, aside from taking pictures of their display (see my Pinterest board for images), I purchased the $10 Generations Set. This set contains a Series 1995, 2001, and 2009 $10 Federal Reserve Note from the Federal Reserve Bank in Philadelphia showing the evolution of the note. What is really great is that all three notes have matching serial numbers. My three have serial number “0527.” Now if I would have understood that the sticky note on the cover was the serial number, I would have asked for something more interesting. At least I have the lowest available.
The packaging of the $10 Generations set is phenomenal. Inside the box is a binder with a booklet showing the history of the $10 note slipped in the pocket, the $10 FRNs in two pages with an intaglio print of Independence Hall on the second page. With only 3,333 to be produced, I am glad I purchased a set.
Comparatively, the BEP can teach the U.S. Mint a little something about packaging—although the wood boxes used for the Eagles and 2009 High Relief Gold Coin were pretty nice, too! But the $10 Generations set looks better than the Making American History Set.
While I did do some walking around and shmoozing, I did spend time at the Maryland State Numismatic Association table. I will be there off and on during the week and at the Gold and Silver Political Action Committee table right across the aisle. I will also try to attend some of the meetings and talks.
Before I forget, I found out there is a group called the Society of Bearded Numismatists who will meet at the show. I was told that they have been inactive for a while and this is the first time they will meet in many years. Well, since I qualify, I want to check this out. They are meeting at 3:00 PM at the World Mint Stage. This should be fun!
Otherwise, if anyone is in the area, come say hello. Whether you are in Philadelphia or watching from afar, watch Twitter (@coinsblog) and my board on Pinterest to see what I find.
Although my collection consists mostly of coins, I have been branching out into some areas of currency. Other than collecting Israeli currency, I am not sure what direction I want to go. Since 2007, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing has issued a yearly $2 Single Note Collection where each folder has a $2 note from each of the Federal Reserve branches and the serial number begins with the year, allowing for only 10,000 collectibles per Fed branch (YYYY0000-YYYY9999). This year, the Single Note is just being issued for the Federal Reserve Band of Kansas City. This is not good for someone who has only purchased the notes from the New York Fed.
This year represents the sesquicentennial of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. Formed as a result of the National Currency Act, the Department of the Treasury opened the National Currency Bureau in a basement office of the Treasury Building on August 29, 1862 to cut and manage the fractional currency that was being printed for the government. With the passage of the National Bank Act of 1863 centralizing currency production with the federal government, the office became its own bureau with a mission to print currency and other security documents. The name was changed a few times before it was settled on the Bureau of Engraving and Printing.
The U.S. Mint and the BEP have combined to sell the Making American History Coin and Currency Set to celebrate the 150th anniversary of the BEP and 220th Anniversary of the U.S. Mint. The set will contain a 2012-S American Silver Eagle Proof coin and a Series 2009 $5 note from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco with a “unique serial number” that begins with “150.”
Sales of the set will be handled by the U.S. Mint and scheduled to begin on August 7, 2012, at 12:00 Noon. Sets will cost $72.95 with no purchase or production limits announced. Considering that the serial number is eight digits long, the de facto limit will probably be 100,000 sets.
Limited edition, three-note set features Series 1995, 2001 and 2009 $10 notes, with matching low serial numbers, from the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
Just announced on July 30, 2012, a new product is the “$10 Generations Set.” This will be a three-note set with Series 1995, 2001 and 2009 $10 notes, with matching low serial numbers, from the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia. The three notes represent the three designs of the small size $10 Federal Reserve Note.
BEP began printing the small-sized notes starting in 1928 with the Series 1929 notes. Since then, the basic designs had note changed until the re-design effort that began in 1996. The $1 Federal Reserve Note continues to use the design similar to that first circulated in 1929.
The set will be in a leatherette binder with the notes stored in acid-free polymer sleeve. Included in the set will be a commemorative print of Independence Hall with the Liberty Bell and “We the People” on the reverse. It will also include a booklet about the history of the $10 note since 1861.
Sales will begin on August 7, 2012. There will be a limit of 3,333 set priced at $149.95, $135 for purchasing ten or more with a 25 set purchase limit the first week.
Since August 7 is the first day of the World’s Fair of Money in Philadelphia, I wonder if the U.S. Mint and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing will have sets there for sale?
There has been a lot of legislation passed by Congress that affects the coin and currency production in the United States. While some of it has been as mundane as changing the composition of coins or the approval of a commemorative coin, there are some that has had a significant impact on coin and currency production. Here is a list of those laws that had a major impact.
Coinage Act of 1792
The first coin-related law passed by congress and signed by President George Washington on April 2, 1792, establishes a mint, says that congress is the regulating authority of coins, and establishes the dollar as the unit of money. It made the United States one of the first countries to use a decimal system for currency and established legal tender laws. It is the foundation for the creation of the money production in the United States.
Act of April 10, 1806
This act regulates the legal tender value of foreign coins used in the United States.
Act of April 21, 1806
This act establishes the penalty for counterfeiting coins to be between three and five years of hard labor. Although there was no law regarding counterfeiting coins before this act, it was assumed that penalty was death because of the statements printed on colonial currency.
Coinage Act of 1834
This act changed the ratio of silver-to-gold weight from 15:1 that was established in the Coinage Act of 1792 to 16:1, setting the price of an ounce of gold to $20.67. This was done to strengthen the financial system after the Panic of 1833 and stem the tide of paper currency in favor of “hard money.” President Andrew Jackson signed this bill into law on June 27, 1834.
Coinage Act of 1849
Signed into law by President James K. Polk as one of his last acts as president on March 3, 1849, it established the use of gold for a $1 coin and the $20 gold double eagle coin. This act also refined the variances that were permissible for United States gold coinage. This act came largely because of the California Gold Rush.
Coinage Act of 1857
Signed into law by President Franklin Pierce February 21, 1857, this act repealed the legal tender status for foreign coins in the United States. It required the Treasury to exchange foreign coins at a market rate set by Treasury. This act discontinued the half-cent and reduced the size of the one-cent coin from 27mm (large cent) to the modern size of 19.05mm (small cent) that is still being used today.
National Bank Act of 1863
Originally known as the National Currency Act and signed into law by President Abraham Lincoln on February 25, 1863, it created a single currency standard for the United States where the notes would be backed by the United States Treasury and printed by the federal government. The result of this act lead to the establishment of the National Currency Bureau which was later rename to the Bureau of Engraving and Printing.
Coinage Act of 1864
This act changed the composition of the one-cent coin to bronze (0.95 copper, 0.05 tin and zinc) from 0.88 copper and 0.12 nickel. It authorized the minting of the two-cent coins with the motto “In God We Trust” to appear the first time on a United States coin. President Abraham Lincoln signed this act into law on April 22, 1864.
Coinage Act of 1873
Sometimes referred to as the “Crime of ’73,” demonetized silver and set the standard for gold as the backing of the national currency. This act placed the U.S. Mint under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Treasury and officially established four branch mints at Philadelphia, San Francisco, Carson City, and Denver. Two assay offices were established in New York and Boise City, Idaho. The act also ended the production of the half-dime, silver three-cent piece, and two-cent coin. President Ulysses S. Grant signed this act on February 12, 1873.
Bland-Allison Act
Named for Rep. Richard P Bland (D-MO) and Sen. William B. Allison (R-IA), the act required the Treasury Department to buy silver from western mines and put them into circulation as silver dollars. The act authorized the striking of the Morgan Dollar. President Rutherford B. Hayes vetoed the bill but congress overrode his veto on February 28, 1873.
Sherman Silver Purchase Act
Signed into law by President Benjamin Harrison on July 14, 1890 and named for Sen. John Sherman (R-OH), the law increased the amount of silver the government was required to purchase from western silver mines.
Federal Reserve Act of 1913
President Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act into law on December 23, 1913 that allowed the creation of the Federal Reserve System as the central bank of the United States. It also granted the Federal Reserve authority to issue Federal Reserve Notes and Federal Reserve Banknotes.
Pittman Act
Named for Sen. Key Pittman (D-NV) and signed into law by President Woodrow Wilson on April 23, 1918 authorized the conversion of up to 350 million silver dollars into bullion for sale or to be used to strike subsidiary coinage. The act required the government to buy all silver mined in the United States at a fixed price of $1 per ounce above market rate.
Gold Reserve Act of 1934
Even though Franklin D. Roosevelt as part of Executive Order 6102 ordered the withdrawal of gold from the economy on April 5, 1933, there was one challenge and one reissue of the executive order. Congress felt that the executive order needed codification and passed this act on January 30, 1934. Roosevelt signed the law the same day. The law withdrew all gold and gold certificates from circulation and outlawed most private possession of gold with the exception of some jewelry and collector coins. This act established the nominal price of gold to $35 per troy ounce.
Public Law 84-851 (70 Stat. 732, H.J.Res. 396)
On July 30, 1956, this law established the national motto of the United States to be “In God We Trust.” While the motto appeared on most coins of the time, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing phased it in on currency between 1957 and 1965.
Coinage Act of 1965
In response to the coin shortages caused by the rising silver prices, the act eliminated silver from circulating dimes, and quarters while reducing the amount of silver used to strike half-dollars from 90-percent to 40-percent for five years. After five years, the half-dollar would be struck using the same copper-nickel clad composition as the lower denominations. The act forbade the striking of silver dollars for five year ending an experiment with the striking of Peace Dollars in 1964. Finally, the act made all coins and currency produced in the United States and certain bank issues as legal tender–which reversed the 1876 demonetization of the Trade Dollar. Signed into law on July 23, 1965 by President Lyndon B. Johnson, it is seen as the dividing line between “classic” and “modern” coinage.
Hobby Protection Act or 1973
Signed into law by President Richard Nixon on November 29, 1973, this act requires that replica collectibles, including coins, be marked “plainly and permanently” with the word “COPY” to indicate that the item is not genuine. This act grants the Federal Trade Commission permission to take action against suppliers who violate this act.
Statue of Liberty-Ellis Island Commemorative Coin Act—Title II: Liberty Coins
Signed by President Ronald Reagan on July 9, 1985, Title II of this act allowed for the U.S. Mint to establish the American Eagle Silver Bullion Program.
Gold Bullion Coin Act of 1985
A few months after the passage of the act to allow for silver bullion coins, this act was enacted on December 17, 1985 that lead to the establishment of the American Eagle Gold Bullion Program.
50 States Commemorative Coin Program Act
Considered one of the most significant act affecting circulating coinage since the Coinage Act of 1965, this act lead to the very successful 50 State Quarters Program. Section 4 of the act, named the “United States $1 Coin Act of 1997” changed the composition of the one dollar coin to be “golden in color” which lead to the creation of the Sacagawea “Golden” Dollar. President Bill Clinton signed this bill into law on December 1, 1997.
Paper currency was first developed in China in the 7th century and later adapted by the Mongol Empire before spreading to Europe and then the United States. China developed currency because of a shortage or metals. Notes printed promised the holder that it be redeemed for something of value and can be traded as specie. The Mongolian Empire learned from the Chinese and issued currency that they backed by the assets of their conquests. Since both China and Mongolia issued state guaranteed currency, the paper was trusted in commerce and helped build a steady stream of commerce between Europe and the east.
Although Europe traded eastern currency as trade was opened between the regions, currency was not a part of regular trade until the 13th century. In Europe, individual banks issued currency as a promissory note against assets held by the bank. Essentially, these were promissory or demand notes that was supposed to allow the holder to trade the note for specie on demand. Unfortunately, the practice was abused to try to raise additional capital and caused a lot of banks to fail.
The problem was not limited to private banks or loan companies. Banks owned by the nation states also tried to use currency as an investment vehicle without sufficient funds to back their values. Currency manipulation by those banks lead to man bank failures and economic depression that are woven through some of the strife through Europe.
Switzerland, France, and England were the first counties to organize and regulate the banks and regulate how they issue currency. Each country has experienced bank failures of not only the state chartered banks but the state central bank making the issued paper currency worthless.
Currency did not see a wide acceptance until it was issued in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in the 17th century. It was the first time that currency was issued in predetermined amounts. Since the colonies did not have the ability to coin money, all colonies issued its own currency by the 18th century. These notes functioned as currency but actually were bills of credit, short-term public loans to the government. For the first time, the money had no intrinsic value but was valued at the rate issued by the government of the colony in payment of debt. Every time the colonial government would need money, they would authorize the printing of a specified quantity and denomination of notes that it would use to pay creditors. The emission laws also included a tax that would used to repay the bill of credit and the promised interest.
As taxes were paid using the paper currency, the paper was retired. As the notes were removed from circulation, that was less payments the government had to make. On the maturity date, people brought their notes to authorized agents who paid off the loan. Agents then turned the notes over to the colonial government to be reimbursed and collect a commission for acting as an agent.
Sometimes, colonies could not pay back the loan. In those cases, the colonies passed another emission law to cover the debt owed from the previous emission plus further operating expenses. In this case, mature notes were traded for new notes. The colonists accepted this system since there were shortages of coins as well as there being an inability to convert the value of foreign coins into colonial shillings by farmers and other unskilled in such matters.
During the revolutionary war, the Continental Congress began to issue paper money to support the war efforts. The colonies also continued to issue paper currency. While the colonial issued notes had some value, those issued by the Continental Congress was not as sure and the notes’ value plummeted. With the saying “Not Worth a Continental” becoming popular so did the term “shinplasters” to describe the notes lining colonialist’s boots to help keep their feet warm.
Counterfeiting was rampant by the mid-18th century. In order to combat the problem, Benjamin Franklin devised the nature print, an imprint of a leaf or other natural item with its unpredictable patterns, fine lines, and complex details made it more difficult to copy.
To create a nature print, Franklin placed a leaf on a damp cloth. The cloth was placed on top of a bed of soft plaster that pressed the leaf into the plaster. Once the plaster hardened, it had a negative impression of the leaf. Molten copper was then poured over the plaster to make the printing plate. Franklin first used nature prints for the 1737 New Jersey emission. He also used different leaves for different denominations and elaborately engraved borders to further thwart the efforts of potential counterfeiters.
Franklin partnered with David Hall printing notes for New Jersey and Pennsylvania colonies. Along with his nature print, Franklin also included the phrase “Tis Death to Counterfeit.” Aside from trying to scare away potential counterfeiters, the penalty for counterfeiting in the 18th century was death. No convictions for counterfeiting colonial currency or death sentences have been recorded.
Later, Hall partnered with William Sellers to print Pennsylvania currency when the Pennsylvania assembly sent Franklin to England as their colonial agent. Other printers tried different methods to thwart counterfeiters. James Parker of Woodbridge, New Jersey printed notes in two colors. With printing a labor-intensive process, it was thought the process to cumbersome for counterfeiters to go through the process of the second printing. Also, Parker used red ink as the second color. Red was more expensive than black ink in the 18th century.
The next wave of note is known as Obsolete Notes, sometimes called Broken Banknotes. These were privately issued currency starting in the 1830s backed by the assets of the issuing bank. These notes became obsolete in the 1860s when many of the issuing banks failed and the federal government changed the laws regarding currency issues. Obsolete notes are a popular collectible since many feature beautiful images, called vignettes, that represent local industries or patriotic themes.
As the Civil War raged, the public hoarded coins creating a shortage of circulating coinage. People started to use postage stamps for transaction requiring small change. Stamps were traded in envelopes that would fall apart causing the gum on the back to make them a sticky mess. As a result, the post office issued small, rectangular Postage Currency in 1862. Postage currency was larger than the postage stamp without the gum on the reverse, and the front depicted the postage stamp and its value. Without the adhesive, they could not be used for postage but could be redeemed at any post office for its face value.
Currency in the United States went from its chaotic stage to something the government issued and regulated with the passage of the National Bank Act of 1863. The law replaced the postage currency with fractional currency. Authorize by the government and printed by the American Banknote Company, fractional currency was issued through 1876 when coinage production caught up with demand and hoarding had ended. At this time, the Currency Bureau, later to be renamed the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) was created to cut and distribute the notes. Fractional currency is a popular collectible especially amongst those with interest in the Civil War.
Another Civil War collectible is Confederate Currency. These banknotes were primarily demand or promissory notes back by non-existent assets that made the notes worthless by the end of the war. During the war, the Confederate States of America issued seven series of currency printed by different printers throughout the south, some in the north, and in London. Confederate coinage, also collectible, was struck using mints under siege in Charlotte, Dahlonega, and New Orleans. During the Civil War, the chief coiner of the New Orleans Mint fled to France to continue producing coins for the Confederacy. This history makes these numismatics are very collectible by history and Civil War buffs.
Following the Civil War, paper currency is identified by type, denomination, and series date. The series date is not necessarily the date in which the note was issued. The series could represent the year the law authorized the notes, the year the production began, or in the case of current Federal Reserve Notes, the year when the signature of the Secretary of the Treasury changes.
Not including fractional and Confederate currency, the following are characteristics of United States currency:
Demand Notes were the first paper currency printed for the United States government for general circulation. These notes were essentially loans to the government during the Civil War to be paid on demand at designated Treasury offices following a maturity date. The backs of these notes were printed in green to prevent counterfeiting by people taking pictures of the note using a camera, the new technology of the time. Green did not photograph well. The term “greenback” came from the use of green inks to print these notes.
United States Notes were the first currency authorized by the Legal Tender Act of 1862 and the first notes printed by the National Currency Bureau. Also known as Legal Tender Notes, these notes were supposed to be backed by assets held by the government that were not necessarily precious metals. Large size United States Notes are very collectible with great designs that make them special.
National Bank Notes allowed banks with a federal charter to issue notes against their assets. In order for the banks to be allowed to issue currency, they had to purchase bonds from the Treasury and were allowed to issue currency up to 90-percent of the value of those bonds. The bonds were used by the federal government to insure the value of the notes. All notes were printed by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing to ensure that the designs were identical with only the bank name, location, and charter number printed for the issuing banks. The National Bank Note program ended in 1935 when the bonds securing the notes were terminated as part of the banking reorganization during the Great Depression. National Bank Notes are great collectibles for those interested in collecting items representing a state or region.
Silver Certificates began in 1878 when the government decided to increase the production of silver coinage with the passage of the Bland-Allison Act to satisfy silver mining interests. Silver coins were deposited with the Treasury and the equivalent dollar amount of silver certificates where produced. Silver Certificates could have been presented to the Treasury Department and redeemed for silver dollars. The series 1953B silver certificates were the last produced for circulation. In 1964, with the price of silver rising, the Treasury stopped redeeming silver certificates for silver dollars and started to distribute small vials of silver flake equal to $1. This redemption program stopped in 1968. All but the very rare 1934 Yellow Seal North Africa notes are available for collectors in nearly every denomination.
Gold Certificates were generally used to transfer money between banks and other large financial institutions. First issued in 1878, Gold Certificates were backed with gold deposited with the Treasury. Some of the lower denominations did circulate to a limited degree, but banks used others. Gold certificates were printed with bright colors, mostly gold-colored, and the reverse on the large notes (pre-1929) were also gold-colored. Small notes were printed with the traditional green reverses. Gold certificates were recalled with the gold recall in 1933.
Treasury Notes were issued as part of an 1890 and 1891 series to be paid to individuals selling silver bullion to the Treasury. Those paid with these notes could redeem them for the equivalent value in gold coins. The Treasury stopped this program after 10 years because of the considerable amount of labor required to carry out this program.
Federal Reserve Notes (FRN) were first issued in 1914 by the newly formed Federal Reserve System and are still being printed and distributed today. When first issued, FRNs were printed as large size notes and were reduced to the small notes we are used to today in 1929. After 1945, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing stopped printing all denomination over $100. By 1969, those large denominations were removed from circulation. Designs of FRNs remained the same until 1995 when the BEP altered the designs to include new security features. However, the $1 FRN has not changed since it was first introduced in 1929. FRN are readily available and accessible to most collectors. Common ways of collecting is by signature pairs. Other ways of collecting FRNs is by serial number patterns (e.g., radar patterns, series, low numbers, etc.), and by Federal Reserve District represented by the note.
Federal Reserve Bank Notes (FRBN) began to be issued in 1915 to transition from National Bank Notes to Federal Reserve notes. FRBN were obligations of the issuing Federal Reserve Bank branch and not the U.S. government. FRBN production was discontinued in 1934 and were stopped being issued in 1945. Since FRBN resembled National Bank Notes except that the issuing bank is a Federal Reserve Branch and are printed with “National Currency” across the top.
Currency collections can be as varied as the types of currency printed. Some currency was printed with themes such as the Educational Series of 1896 that used allegorical images in an attempt to educate the public. Other ways to collect currency is by their design, the color of the seal, the issuing bank, serial numbers, and signers.
If you collect by signers on the note, one of the more interesting notes is known as Barr Notes named for Joseph W. Barr, the 59th Secretary of the Treasury. Barr was confirmed and sworn into office on December 21, 1968, one month before the end of the Lyndon B. Johnson administration. Since the Secretary of the Treasury’s signature is on all Federal Reserve Notes, the BEP printed over 485 million one dollar notes with Barr’s signature before his term ended on January 20, 1969.
In the case of currency, size matters. Aside from the denomination, standard currency printed by the BEP used to be larger than it is today. Prior to 1929, U.S currency was 7 1/2 inches long by 3 1/8 inches wide. These are commonly called large notes. Another nickname for these notes are horse blankets. Beginning in 1929 with the Series 1928 notes, U.S. currency was reduced to the 6 1/8 inches by 2 5/8 inches notes we are used to using today. These are commonly called small notes.
If you ever looked at a note and noticed that a star (“*”) was included in the beginning or end of the serial number, you have a Star Note. A Star Note is used to denote that the note is a replacement note for one found to be defective or damaged during the printing process. To maintain the correct number of notes in a print run, the serial numbers are reclaimed and a star is added to note the replacement. Since Star Notes are replacements for errors, they are not as common as normal notes and are popular with collectors.
Originally released on March 30, 2012 and updated on April 12, the Department of the Treasury updated their video honoring the history of women working for the U.S. Mint and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing over its history. The video also honors the 220th Anniversary of the U.S. Mint and the 150th Anniversary of the BEP.
Introduced by Treasurer of the United States Rosie Rios, the video shows how both the U.S. Mint and the BEP have a history of providing opportunities for women since each agencies founding.
Considering that women were considered second class citizens in the 18th century, it is amazing to find out that within two years the U.S. Mint hired two women to be adjusters. When the BEP was founded in 1862, women were hired alongside men and held the majority of positions within four years. I do not think any other agency in the U.S. government has a similar recrod.
The media, blogs, and pundits who do not read government reports beyond the executive summary have shown their lack of journalistic credibility over the latest report from the Government Accountability Office titled Alternative Scenarios Suggest Different Benefits and Losses from Replacing the $1 Note with a $1 Coin (GAO-12-307 [PDF] published February 15, 2012).
The latest tome from the GAO is a followup to GAO-11-281, Replacing the $1 Note with a $1 Coin Would Provide a Financial Benefit to the Government published almost a year ago. It was a report produced for the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs and addressed to Sens. Richard Shelby (R-AL), Bob Casey (D-PA), and Tom Harkin (D-IA) after being asked to analyze the cost differences to the government using a dollar coin over the dollar note. In that report, the GAO estimated that replacing the note with a coin will save an estimated $5.5 billion over the 30 year lifetime of a coin.
Rather than accepting that report, Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) used his position as the Ranking Member of the Senate Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services, and International Security, commissioned the GAO to rework the report under different condition. Sen. Brown asked the GAO not to add seigniorage to the calculation, reduce the report to cover ten years, and calculate the a one-to-one replacement rather than the 1.5 coins to one note replacement used in the 2011 report.
Seigniorage is the profit the U.S. Mint and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing earns on producing their products. It is calculated by the difference between the cost of producing the money versus its face value, which is what the Federal Reserve pays for that money. For example, the BEP reports that it costs 7½ cents to print one note. When they sell a one dollar Federal Reserve Note to the Federal Reserve, the BEP collects 92½ cents for that transaction. By law, both the U.S. Mint and BEP deposit seigniorage into their respective Public Enterprise Funds (see 31 U.S.C. § 5136 for the U.S. Mint and 31 U.S.C. § 5142 for the BEP). Both laws require the Secretary of the Treasury to deposit excess over what is needed for operations into the General Fund. Not only are these bureaus manufacturing money, they earn money that is deposited for the general use of the government.
Seigniorage is an important factor in the operations of the money manufacturing operations of the U.S. Mint and BEP which is why it is important in the analysis of any bill introduced in congress. This analysis is performed by the Congressional Budget Office. When the economists of the CBO to reads a bill and determine its effect the country’s budget, they are supposed to take every aspect of the bill into consideration. Since all coin-related bills requires the U.S. Mint to deposit its profit in their Public Enterprise Fund, calculating the effect that seigniorage has is required. If fact, when the CBO analyzed the Presidential $1 Coin Act of 2005, the “CBO estimates that replacing the Golden Dollar with the $1 Presidential coin would increase seigniorage by about $280 million over the 2006-2015 period.”
What Sen. Brown asked the CBO to do is to figure out what would happen if the U.S. Mint was to produce more coins but not count their profit what would the effect be. The answer is not based in any reality because if you do not count the profit (seigniorage) you are only telling part of the story. Basically, Senator Brown is asking to the CBO to use the sin of omission in an attempt to justify his policy position.
Remember, Senator Scott Brown is the junior senator from Massachusetts where the Dalton-based Crane & Co. is the sole supplier of currency paper to the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. Brown, who is completing the term of the late Senator Ted Kennedy, would never have been appointed the Ranking Member of any subcommittee as a freshman member except that he is a Republican who won a long standing Democratic seat. Brown is currently locked in a heated campaign against Elizabeth Warren (D) for the 2012 election.
It is clear that Sen. Brown changed the parameters of the original GAO report (GAO-11-281) as a way to stop attempts to replace the paper note with coin to use in his campaign for his senate seat as a favor to Crane & Co. Unfortunately, the media outlets who covered the release of this report has chosen to read the executive summary and skipped Page 1 that begins “Dear Senator Brown.”
Treasurer of the United States, Rosie Rios, will sign currency notes/sheets at the Bureau of Engraving and Printing Washington printing facility between 10:00 A.M. and 12 Noon on Friday, December 16, 2011. This event is free and open to the public. Reservations are not required. Visitors participating in this even may exchange older $1 Federal Reserve Notes for $1 Series 2009 notes with the signatures of Treasure Rosie Rios and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, or purchase uncut sheets/individual notes in the BEP’s Visitor Center. Please note that there is a limit of two items per person for Treasurer Rio’s signature. The BEP is located at 14th & C Streets, SW, Washington, DC 20228.
The Bank of Canada formally unveiled their new polymer banknotes on Tuesday at its main offices in Ottawa. Canada’s central bank representatives explained the new currency designs and the security features that will be included in the notes. Minister of Finance Jim Flaherty said that the note’s “designs celebrate Canada’s achievements at home, around the world and in space. Bank notes are cultural touchstones that reflect and celebrate our Canadian experience.”
New polymer $100 notes, on schedule to be issued in November 2011, will feature images that focus on Canadian innovations in the field of medicine. The obverse of the note will include an updated portrait of Sir Robert Borden, Prime Minister of Canada between 1911 and 1920.
Security features of the note are two transparent areas that will be difficult to counterfeit yet be easy to check. Most prominent are two transparent areas: the larger area extends from the top to the bottom of the note and contains complex holographic features. The other is in the shape of a maple leaf. “The Bank’s objective with every new series is to produce a bank note that Canadians can use with the highest confidence,” said Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney.
RCMP Commissioner William J.S. Elliott added, “These new and technically innovative notes will go a long way to deter the threat of counterfeiting in coming years.”
The Bank of Canada issued a video showing off their new $100 note and the security features:
Une version de cette vidéo en français peuvent être trouvés ici.
In the mean time, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing has been silent on the production and potential release of the United State’s new $100 Federal Reserve Note. Release of the new note has been delayed since its scheduled February release date because of production problems.
“The single biggest obstacle to successful production was the tendency of the $100 currency paper with the three dimensional security ribbon to crease as the sheets of paper fed through the intaglio printing press,” BEP Director Larry Felix reported in the bureau’s 2010 Annual Report.
I tried to contact a BEP Media Relations representative about the status of the new notes. I was told there was no additional information available.
I ask again: With the new $100 note having printing problems, why has the BEP not looked into using the polymer substrate for U.S. currency? Why does the Federal Reserve, BEP, and Secret Service cling to 19th and 20th century printing technologies in the 21st century? Or is this a matter of “not invented here” to avoid alleged controversy by using a something invented by a foreign central bank?
It is time for the money producing cabal of the Federal Reserve, BEP, and Secret Service to face reality. They need to cut their losses with paper and look to the future for something better.
Last March, the Government Accountability Office, the investigative research arm of the legislative branch, issued a report with the alliterative title “Replacing the $1 Note with a $1 Coin Would Provide a Financial Benefit to the Government” (GAO-11-281 [PDF]). The report opens by saying that “According to GAO’s analysis, replacing the $1 note with a $1 coin could save the government approximately $5.5 billion over 30 years. This would amount to an average yearly discounted net benefit—that is, the present value of future net benefits—of about $184 million.”
In 2008, I posted a similar analysis of the benefit of using “Paper v. Coin Dollars” with the political reasons of that time as to why the paper dollar would continue to be printed. Although the political landscape have changed, the will of the politicians to make this change does not exist.
Last month, a coalition that includes Brink’s, Inc., independent car wash operators, and public transportation officials responded against the GAO report citing the alleged logistical issues and increased costs in handling a dollar coin versus paper.
On their side opposing the sole use of a $1 coin is the Department of the Treasury and the Federal Reserve. They cite the differences in the weight and the public’s attachment to the paper dollar. In a USA Today/Gallup poll conducted in 2006 found that while 54-percent thought the Presidential $1 Coin thought the program was a good idea, 79-percent said that they do not want the coins to replace the paper dollar.
The political and economic environment has change. The GAO’s report bolstered the Dollar Coin Alliance, who has reportedly spent $250,000 to lobby congress since December. With the emphasis on the budget, a plan to find ways to generate revenues with little political risk has the concept of eliminating the paper dollar being taken seriously. This has the anti-coin dollar coalition worried.
Another factor working against the anti-coin dollar advocates is the loss of a major ally in congress. The late Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) did not want to see the paper dollar eliminated because it would hurt the Dalton, Mass. based Crane & Co.. Crane is the sole supplier of currency paper that the Bureau of Engraving and Printing uses to produce the one dollar note. John Olver (D-MA) represents the the Massachusetts First Congressional District that includes Dalton.
Although the political environment favors the elimination of the paper dollar, the risk adverse members of congress will look at the 2006 poll and probably not vote to eliminate the paper dollar. Unless key congressional leaders agree that ending the printing of the one-dollar note is in the best interests of everyone, including their political careers, the political reality is that printing of the dollar note is here to stay.
Dollar note image courtesy of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing Dollar coin image courtesy of the U.S. Mint
This week, the Bank of Canadaannounced that they will be converting their banknotes from paper to using the polymer substrate. The Bank of Canada will begin to issue C$100 notes in November 2011. A C$50 note will be issued in March 2012 and the remaining denominations (C$20, C$10, and C$5) will be issued in 2013.
The polymer “paper” was developed by the Reserve Bank of Australia to enhance the durability of the notes and to incorporate security features not possible with paper or rag-based paper. RBA has been distributing polymer notes since 1992. While the polymer substrate costs little more and the production is only marginally more expensive, the benefit will come from the reduction in counterfeiting and the durability of the note. Polymer will last three-to-six times longer than rag-based paper.
On April 21, 2010, the government unveiled the new $100 note design. The new note, still made of rag-based paper, would incorporate new security features such as a different use of color shifting ink and a 3-D security ribbon. The note would continue to use security features first introduced in U.S. currency in 1996. The new notes were scheduled to be issued on February 10, 2011.
However, on October 1, 2010, the Federal Reserveannounced that the issue of the redesigned $100 note will be delayed. It has been reported that the notes are folding during the printing process making a number of them unusable. It was further reported that the BEP is working with its paper provider, Crane & Co., to fix the issue.
I had asked a BEP Media Relations representative about the status of the new notes. I was told there was no additional information available.
With the new $100 note having printing problems, why has the BEP not looked into using the polymer substrate for U.S. currency? Why does the Federal Reserve, BEP, and Secret Service cling to 19th and 20th century printing technologies in the 21st century? Or is this a matter of “not invented here” to avoid alleged controversy by using a something invented by a foreign central bank?
It may be time for the Federal Reserve, BEP, and Secret Service to face reality that the old ways of doing things are not working and to look to the future for something better.