Put Reagan on a New Dollar Coin
I'm a weird sort of numismatist (i.e., a coin collector, you dirty-minded bastage): I horde virtually every penny I come across, storing them away in wine bottles (and even in the casing of an old artillery shell my Daddy left me). I separate them by mint, keeping Philadelphia-minted pennies in their own bottle (they're much less common than ones from Denver ---at least this side of the Mississippi). I love finding a wheat penny in my change. I think to myself, "How can this thing still be circulating? Don't people spend their time as wisely as I do, inspecting the dates of all the coins in their pockets?" If I get a penny from my birthyear, I put that in its own bottle. If I come across a penny from any of my family's birthyears, I keep those separated, too. I always save any silver coin from 1964 or before. And I always save any Bicentennial Quarter. I never spend my favorite state quarters. (Now that Texas has its own issue, I doubt I'll ever spend any of those.)

And, as for the dollar coin, that's always been a favorite cause with me. But we've had some pretty lame ones in recent decades ---and no one uses them. The Eisenhower Dollar is nice to look at, but was much too large. And the infamous Susan B. Anthony was crap from day one: confusingly similar to the quarter and bearing the image of a woman whose accomplishments and stature do not entitle her to such an exalted place in our coinage. And even though I really don't care for the now-discontinued Sacagawea (because it looks like a Chuck E. Cheese token when it tarnishes), it doesn't dissuade me from believing that a dollar coin is the smart way to go for the American consumer.

That's because paper dollars don't usually last very well beyond two or so years of use, but a dollar coin can last for many decades. So, although a paper dollar is more cheaply produced than a coin of that same denomination, the durability of the coin makes it the more economical choice in the long run.

I don't think we should displace Hamilton from the $10 bill as some are pushing for; he is a Founding Father and an important symbol of the American free market system. But we can accomplish two very important things if we put a portrait of Ronald Reagan on a new dollar coin.

First, we will be honoring one of the true giants of the 20th Century. Maybe he wouldn't have wanted such an honor, and maybe Mrs. Reagan is resistant to it, too, but in the wake of such a grand and prominent state funeral, I am not inclined to believe that she is truly averse to celebrating her husband's legacy. Reagan belongs somewhere within the popular memory ---and to be on the basic denomination of everyday economic life is a fitting tribute.

Second, as I say, the dollar coin makes good sense. It is manufacturally more sound than the perpetually-replaced paper dollar (and, besides, if we phase out the greenback as we should, Washington will still be on the quarter ---as well as being the most ubiquitous figure in all of American iconography). The promotion of the dollar coin is something that needs genuine popular support ---and if that means first making its use appealing to Reaganites (who, by the way, constitute a majority of Americans, regardless of what the weenies on the Left might have you believe), then that's all to the good.

Using a Reagan Dollar would, therefore, begin as a small gesture of patriotism by most people, eventually growing into a practical act with all who still want the freedom to pay for a Coke or a parking space or a toll with the convenience of a sturdy coin, rather than turning more and more to sticking a credit card or a pass into the monitoring maw of modern life.