Addendum to "Losing One to the Gipper"

Additional notes for "Losing One to the Gipper":

It has become apparent that at least some conservatives are embarrassed by the Ronald Reagan Legacy Project. George Will and the Weekly Standard have both criticized the project since my piece was written, citing the Hamilton proposal and a threat by Rep. Bob Barr to withhold funding to the Washington area’s Metro system if Reagan’s name is not added to the train station at National Airport. Even the Legacy Project is embarrassed by what may be Reagan’s biggest monument of all, predating the project: the giant new federal office building at Federal Triangle in D.C., reputed to be the largest government building in the country after the Pentagon.

It has come to my attention that I missed two of most important GOP Hamilton fans: Sen. Henry Cabot Lodge of Massachusetts, who wrote the "American Statesmen" series volume on Hamilton, and Sen. Arthur Vandenberg of Michigan, who wrote two books on Hamilton during the 1920s. The titles leave no doubt about where Vandenberg stood: If Hamilton Were Here Today: American Fundamentals Applied to Modern Problems and The Greatest American, Alexander Hamilton. Perhaps this is how Hamilton made the ten in the first place!

A very belated callback from David Kralik, Executive Director of Legacy Project and Deputy Communications Director of Americans for Tax Reform, provided little insight into the thinking behind the proposed cutting of Hamilton, but many more examples of the talking points with which it is being sold and defended. Any animus against Hamilton was denied. The ten was chosen because simply because it was a high circulation bill, Kralik claimed, and did not contain a completely sacrosanct figure like Washington or Lincoln. At the same time, the ten was politically appropriate because, in the Legacy Project’s view, "Reagan’s policies were geared toward the middle class." Hence they wanted Reagan on currency that this alleged "middle class" of capital gains tax cut beneficiaries would use, known as they are to shun such high-falutin denominations as the twenty. Asked how the project could justify demoting a Founding Father, Kralik responded by cheerfully inserting Reagan into the pantheon. "Reagan was basically a Founding Father in the 20th century," he said. "He gave America its pride back." And really, you killjoys, what is a Constitution, a national government, an educational system, a labor movement, or an environment compared to our pride?