On January 30, the idea of adding former President Donald Trump to Mount Rushmore took one step closer to reality when U.S. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) introduced legislation aimed at carving Trump’s likeness onto the iconic monument. "His remarkable accomplishments for our country and the success he will continue to deliver deserve the highest recognition and honor on this iconic national monument," Luna stated on social media, urging, "Let’s get carving!" The bill has since sparked heated discussions across the political spectrum, with supporters touting it as fitting homage and critics questioning the practicality and ethics of modifying the historic landmark.
The proposed legislation, aimed at design and oversight by the Interior Department, is merely the beginning of what could be a long and complicated process. According to Luna, the bill states: "Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America ... the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the director of the National Park Service, should arrange for the carving of the figure of President Donald J. Trump on Mount Rushmore National Memorial." Luna made her proposal public less than 24 hours after the topic was raised during a Fox News discussion about honoring Trump as part of the 250th anniversary of America's founding.
Support for the bill from certain corners of the Republican Party has fueled its visibility, with former Rep. Jason Chaffetz expressing on Fox News, "I think Donald Trump has transformed the United States of America and put America first. And I think there’s a great case for it." Similarly, Kayleigh McEnany, former press secretary for Trump, found it intriguing and fed the narrative by adding, "If you did the 250th anniversary of the country at Mount Rushmore with President Trump’s face, it would be epic!" Their sentiments reflect growing enthusiasm among Trump supporters, who see such recognition as justly deserved.
Yet significant opposition looms, marked by the actions of Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.), who earlier proposed legislation to prevent changes to Mount Rushmore, citing the need to protect the work of the original sculptor, Gutzon Borglum. His measure would hinder federal funding for any alterations to the monument, which was finished over 80 years ago. Notably, Johnson's co-sponsor on this bill is fellow Republican, Byron Donalds, indicating bipartisan concern over Luna’s proposal.
Mount Rushmore, which features the carved faces of Presidents Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and Roosevelt, has long been viewed as both a national treasure and a controversial symbol of America’s complex history. Nick Tilsen, president of the NDN Collective and member of the Oglala Lakota tribe, reiterated the monument's problematic legacy, stating, "Mount Rushmore is a symbol of white supremacy, of structural racism." His comments highlight the broader conversation about historical representation and the often painful narratives associated with such landmarks.
The argument for Trump's addition is not entirely novel; Trump himself publicly joked about wanting to be added to the monument during his presidency, describing it as his "dream." At the time, he acknowledged the potential backlash, citing concerns about how it might look politically. He stated, "If I answer yes, I will end up with bad publicity." This historical hesitation hints at the divisive nature of any such proposals related to his legacy.
Despite the fervent discussions and media attention, logistical realities present significant hurdles. According to past statements from the National Park Service, adding any new figures to Mount Rushmore is deemed practically impossible. The monument was completed with no additional carvable rock, and parks official Maureen McGee-Ballinger noted back in 2020, "The monument has no more carvable rock on which to add presidents." Therefore, the acknowledgment remains whether the proposed project is feasible or merely political posturing.
Though the talk surrounding adding Trump's face to Mount Rushmore is undeniably controversial, the proposal reflects larger trends within the Republican Party to solidify Trump's influence and legacy. Proponents argue it showcases Trump's pivotal role during his presidency, citing economic growth and nationalistic sentiments as arguments for recognition, at least from their standpoint. Notably, as the nation nears its 250th anniversary, such symbols may become even more central to political narratives.
Critics of the proposal remain skeptical about whether this is the most appropriate way to honor Trump or if alternative actions might be more suited to his influence. Amidst the debates, some offer alternatives, such as naming public buildings or airports after Trump, indicating they feel his legacy could be honored without altering historical landmarks.
What is clear is this topic reflects significant political rifts within the nation and reveals the varied perspectives Americans hold toward historical symbols. Mount Rushmore remains etched not just with the likenesses of historic figures but with the contentious dialogues shaping America today. The fate of Luna's bill is uncertain, and whether it garners enough support to pass through Congress is yet to be seen.
Overall, the proposal to add Donald Trump’s likeness to Mount Rushmore is not just about carving granite; it's about ideological battles and the enduring question of how America chooses to memorialize its complex history.