Republican Lawmaker Proposes Replacing Benjamin Franklin with Donald Trump on $100 Bill
A contentious proposal has emerged from the halls of Congress, sparking debate and igniting political passions. Representative Brandon Gill, a Republican representing Texas’s 26th Congressional District, has introduced a bill seeking to replace Benjamin Franklin’s image on the $100 bill with that of former President Donald Trump. The proposed legislation, dubbed the "Golden Age Act of 2025," has swiftly become a lightning rod, drawing both fervent support and staunch opposition.
Gill’s rationale for the change, outlined in a press release, centers on his belief that Trump has ushered in a "golden age" for America. He lauded Trump’s efforts to secure the border, address trade imbalances, achieve energy independence, and prioritize American interests. "There has been no one who has done more to bring America into the golden age than President Trump," Gill asserted, adding that featuring Trump on the $100 bill would be a fitting tribute to his accomplishments.
The bill specifies that the Secretary of the Treasury would have until December 31, 2026, to unveil a preliminary design of the Trump-emblazoned $100 note. If the legislation gains traction and ultimately passes, all $100 bills printed after December 31, 2028, would bear Trump’s portrait on the front.
Representative Troy Nehls, also a Republican from Texas, has signed on as the original co-sponsor of Gill’s bill. However, the legislation faces a considerable uphill battle. It must navigate the complex legislative process, requiring passage in both the House and the Senate before it can be signed into law by the president.
Gill’s background is noteworthy. He was raised on a cattle ranch in Texas and spent his youth working on the family farm. According to his biography, he attended Dartmouth College before embarking on a career in finance, working as an investment banker on Wall Street and later as an analyst for a global hedge fund. He ultimately left the financial world to establish DC Enquirer, a conservative news outlet with an "America First" focus. Gill has stated that he felt a calling to serve his country, which led him to leave his lucrative career in finance.
The political landscape may favor Gill’s proposal to some extent. With Republicans having secured control of both the Senate and the House in the 2024 election, the bill has a greater chance of advancing than it would have under a Democratic-controlled Congress. However, the proposal remains highly controversial, and its fate is far from certain.
The tradition of featuring prominent figures on U.S. currency dates back centuries. Benjamin Franklin, a Founding Father and a symbol of American ingenuity and diplomacy, has been featured on the $100 bill since 1914. Replacing him with Trump would represent a significant departure from established norms and could be interpreted as a symbolic endorsement of Trump’s political legacy.
It is important to consider the historical context of the $100 bill and the figures it has traditionally honored. Franklin’s presence on the bill reflects his contributions to the founding of the United States, his role in shaping American identity, and his enduring legacy as a statesman, scientist, and inventor. Removing Franklin and replacing him with a more contemporary figure like Trump would inevitably spark debate about whose achievements and values should be celebrated on U.S. currency.
Moreover, it is crucial to acknowledge that the vast majority of bills introduced in Congress never become law. Emory Law estimates that only about 6% of legislation introduced in Congress is ultimately enacted. Many bills are introduced for symbolic purposes, to appease constituents or special interest groups, or to raise awareness about a particular issue.
Gill’s proposal to put Trump on the $100 bill is not the only recent attempt to memorialize the former president. Representative Anna Paulina Luna, a Republican from Florida, introduced a bill proposing to carve Trump’s likeness into Mount Rushmore. Luna’s proposal, which lacks details regarding timing and funding, includes a rendering of Trump’s face alongside those of Presidents George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Theodore Roosevelt.
These proposals to honor Trump through iconic symbols have elicited strong reactions, with supporters hailing them as appropriate recognition of Trump’s accomplishments and critics denouncing them as examples of political grandstanding. The debate surrounding these proposals highlights the deep divisions within American society and the ongoing struggle to define Trump’s place in American history.
The proposed change to the $100 bill would have significant implications for the design and production of U.S. currency. The Bureau of Engraving and Printing would need to develop a new design featuring Trump’s portrait, and new printing plates would need to be created. The transition to the new design would likely be a complex and costly undertaking.
The potential economic consequences of changing the design of the $100 bill should also be considered. The U.S. dollar is widely used in international trade and finance, and any changes to its appearance could affect its acceptance and value in global markets. While the impact of a change in the bill’s design is difficult to predict, it is essential to carefully assess the potential economic risks and benefits before making any decisions.
Beyond the practical considerations, the proposal to replace Franklin with Trump on the $100 bill raises fundamental questions about the values and symbols that should be enshrined in American currency. Should U.S. currency feature historical figures who represent enduring ideals and principles, or should it reflect the political priorities and preferences of the current administration? The answer to this question is likely to depend on one’s political perspective and beliefs about the role of money in society.
Ultimately, the fate of Gill’s bill will depend on a complex interplay of political factors, including the level of support it receives from Republican leaders, the degree of opposition it faces from Democrats, and the overall political climate in the country. Regardless of whether the bill ultimately passes, it has already sparked a lively debate about American history, political symbolism, and the legacy of Donald Trump.
