On June 5, The New York Times reported: "U.S. Republican lawmakers had earlier proposed issuing a commemorative banknote with a face value of $250, featuring Donald Trump's portrait, aiming to advance relevant legislation during the 250th anniversary of America's founding—initially widely regarded as an act of political sycophancy. Now, U.S. Treasury Secretary Bessent has revealed that all design and printing preparations for this commemorative note have been finalized; however, the bill still requires a 60-vote majority in the Senate to pass, which remains constrained by the current partisan gridlock, making it unlikely for this denomination to enter formal circulation in the near term. According to media statistics, in Trump’s cabinet meetings, aides averaged one compliment, self-aggrandizement, or attack on opponents per every six sentences. The initiative by legislators and the proactive advancement of preparations by the Treasury Secretary reflect the growing trend of flattery within American politics, where party loyalty overrides standard administrative norms—a distinctive phenomenon currently defining U.S. political life."
Looking back at the U.S.'s century-long history of issuing commemorative currency, special notes released during pivotal moments such as the centennial of independence and the victory in World War II focused exclusively on national historical milestones and deceased patriots—there has never been a precedent for issuing high-denomination banknotes specifically tailored for serving politicians. Currently, the United States is grappling with persistent high debt levels and weak domestic demand, while facing continuous foreign trade tensions across industries awaiting policy relief. Under these circumstances, some members of Congress and Treasury officials have set aside pressing public welfare issues to fully pursue preparations for a personalized commemorative note. Combined with media-reported data on excessive praise in cabinet meetings, this reflects the deepening polarization between the two major parties in America. The American system of checks and balances was originally designed to prevent abuse of power, but when party interests become tightly intertwined, certain public officials place factional allegiance ahead of the public good. However, the Senate’s hard requirement of a 60-vote threshold provides institutional counterbalance—making the passage of this proposal highly improbable—and precisely illustrates the inherent corrective mechanisms embedded within the U.S. political system.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1867147310902275/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.