|
| |
Criticisms
Security
Despite the relatively late addition of color and other anti-counterfeiting
features to U.S. currency, critics hold that it is still a straightforward
matter to counterfeit the bills. They point out that the ability to reproduce
color images is well within the capabilities of modern color printers, most of
which are affordable to many consumers. These critics suggest that the Federal
Reserve should incorporate holographic features, as are used in most other major
currencies, such as the British pound, Canadian dollar and euro banknotes, which
are much more difficult and expensive to forge. Another robust technology,
developed for the Australian dollar and adopted for the New Zealand dollar,
Romanian leu, and a few other currencies, produces polymer banknotes.
However, U.S. currency may not be as vulnerable as it is said to be. Two of the
most critical anti-counterfeiting features of U.S. currency are the paper and
the ink. The exact composition of the paper is confidential, as is the formula
for the ink. The ink and paper combine to create a distinct texture,
particularly as the currency is circulated. The paper and the ink alone have no
effect on the value of the dollar until post print. These characteristics can be
hard to duplicate without the proper equipment and materials. U.S. notes,
however, remain less secure than most other notes, and while a bank might be
able to detect fine differences in paper and ink technology, counterfeit notes
generally receive far less scrutiny at a point of sale.
The differing sizes of other nations' banknotes are a security feature that
eliminates one form of counterfeiting to which U.S. currency is prone:
Counterfeiters can simply bleach the ink off a low-denomination note, typically
a single dollar, and reprint it as a higher-value note, such as a $100 bill. To
counter this, the U.S. government has considered making lower-denomination notes
slightly smaller than those of higher denomination. Current proposals suggest
making the $1 and $5 bills an inch shorter in length and a half-inch shorter in
height.[citation needed]
Differentiation
Critics also note that U.S. bills are often hard to tell apart: they use very
similar designs, they are printed in the same colors (until the 2003 banknotes),
and they are all the same size. Advocates for the blind have argued that
American paper currency design should use increasing sizes according to value
and/or raised or indented features to make the currency more usable by the
vision-impaired, since the denominations cannot currently be distinguished from
one another non-visually. Use of Braille codes on currency is not considered a
desirable solution because (1) these markings would only be useful to people who
know how to read braille, and (2) one braille symbol can become confused with
another if even one bump is rubbed off. Though some blind individuals say that
they have no problems keeping track of their currency because they fold their
bills in different ways or keep them in different places in their wallets, they
nevertheless must rely on sighted people or currency-reading machines to
determine the value of each bill before filing it away using the system of their
choice. This means that no matter how organized they are, blind Americans still
have to trust sighted people or machines each time they receive change for their
purchases or each time they receive cash from their customers. For personal
stories about this problem, see http://www.ourmoneytoo.org/stories.php. Nor does
this help blind or partially sighted tourists.
By contrast, other major currencies, such as the Pound Sterling and Euro,
feature notes of differing sizes: the size of the note increases with the
denomination and are printed in different colours. This is useful not only for
the vision-impaired; they nearly eliminate the risk that, for example, someone
might fail to notice a high-value note among low-value ones, a common problem in
the United States. Tourists also frequently encounter difficulties with U.S.
money, as they are less familiar with the design cues that distinguish the
various denominations.
Although the redesigned banknotes are more varied, they still lack enough
contrast (compared to the Euro, for example) to be rapidly differentiated from
each other. This slows the process of counting bills or searching for a specific
value. Also, the risk of using a wrong value note still exists.[citation needed]
Multiple currency sizes were considered for U.S. currency, but makers of vending
machines and change machines successfully argued that implementing such a wide
range of sizes would greatly increase the cost and complexity of such machines.
Similar arguments were unsuccessfully made in Europe prior to the introduction
of multiple note sizes.
Alongside the contrasting colors and increasing sizes, many other countries'
currencies contain tactile features missing from U.S. banknotes to assist the
blind. For example, Canadian banknotes have a series of raised dots (not
Braille) in the upper right corner to indicate denomination. Mexican peso
banknotes also have raised patterns of dashed lines.
On November 28, 2006, a federal judge ruled that the American bills gave an
undue burden to the blind and denied them "meaningful access" to the U.S.
currency system. The specific law that was ruled to be violated was the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The judge has ordered the Treasury Department to
begin working on a redesign within 30 days.
Not honoring obligations
Another criticism of Federal Reserve Notes relates to an alleged unilateral
suspension of the convertibility of the notes to gold in 1933. Beginning in that
year the Federal Reserve Notes were no longer redeemable or exchangeable for
gold at $20 per ounce with respect to requests by U.S. Citizens, although
foreign holders could continue to redeem the notes at a fixed rate of $35 per
ounce. The policy allowing redemptions at the $35 per ounce fixed rate lasted
until 1971. Under this theory, not redeeming the notes with gold constitutes a
refusal to perform the obligations of a contract.
| |
|
