Coin News Asks Some Good Questions

There was an article posted to Coin News yesterday asking a good question, "Should the Senate follow suit [and pass the National Parks Quarter Dollar Bill]?"

Other good questions are posited. I will give my spin on them in order to become one of those who would get mad if this became law.

Is their coin fervor resulting from the will/desires of people?
Doubtful. I'm sure this was just dreamed up and then the explanation for it came later. I am sure that I did something similar but let me rephrase then. Here is my guess on the genesis of this bill. Micheal Castle: "Hmmmmmm. I could write legislation to help my constituents with high gas prices/health care/or some other pressing issue OR I could write another coin bill. They are innocuous and it'll only generate good press and everyone will like me. I think I'll go the easy route"

If you have children, would they take more interest in saving identical looking coins or coins each with a different design? Which is more likely to start them into the coin collecting hobby for life? Why?
On the surface, this would appear as if it is a good argument. However, it requires looking at a number of different aspects of these programs before making a judgment call. First, I want to reiterate that the concluding state quarter dollar program was a good thing. Most US coinage had been static for decades with uninspired designs that we'd been stuck with because they contained genuine dead people. The state quarter dollar program was a breath of fresh air because every 10 weeks the public would see something different show up in change and it was exciting. It should be noted that coin collecting saw an upswing in the 30's with the introduction of coin boards where people enjoyed saving coins from change (primarily Lincoln cents) that, surprise surprise, all had the same design. I would like to distance myself from those who want to see no changes to our coins at all. Let me make an analogy (and hopefully craft it in a way as it would not be considered a Bad/Dull Simile/Metaphor). Imagine that our coins are like adult life. You can go on vacation and have a great time. You're refreshed and rejuvenated but you can't be on vacation forever. At some point you have to come back to your stable life. But this analogy can be stretched a bit further. As most adults do, they move around occasionally. That is to say, the current program is a nice vacation but its time to come home (though it doesn't even have to be the same home [analogy breaks down here]). Change is nice but not change just for the sake of change.

We can also talk about artistry. Is it better to have one really well designed coin design or hundreds of low quality snapshot-esque coins. As I mentioned in the precious paragraph, the snapshot-esque coins are not inherently a bad thing but they can be when perpetuated almost indefinitely. If in 2010 we were to have a new design on the quarter, one that is more in vein with the 20th Century Coin Renaissance that would be a true benefit to the hobby.

That brings me to the second question. Bringing in newcomers to the hobby is important we should be doing it for the right reasons. The State Quarter Dollar Program did help bring more people into the hobby and I will not claim that it was bad. But should we retain them with more mostly low quality designs in some sort of ADD inspired means? Do we want to bring kids into the program simply by having new coin designs every 10 weeks while they're young and not instilling in them the ability to savor coin design. I think the ADD analogy is most apt here. Do we want to draw new people in with gimmicks? (I do not think the state quarter dollar program is a gimmick but the presidential dollars and this new program are certainly just that)

Which choice can potentially grow the coin collecting community? Which has the potential to create more positive news for collecting and coins?
The first question has been mostly answered in the previous section and I do not want to belabor any points (thought that might be too late). Even the second question is related to the first section. Does the hobby get a lot of continuing positive press from the current program? I know that when there is a launch ceremony there is an article in Coin World (though if you get that, you're already a coin collector) and it is probably covered more extensively within the state being honored. But most of the people that I interact with on a daily basis are not affected by these changes and don't mention them and don't pay any attention to them. I would say that either having a new coin program or just having a new design that will be around awhile would generate equal positive news.

My hope is that through this post it can become clear how there might be someone actually get mad if this coin program comes about. Read my lips, no new gimmicks!