The East Wing of the White House is no more.
Aerial imagery showed the wing of the nation’s most famous building that has been used by first ladies for decades has been razed.
In its place, President Trump intends to erect a new ballroom.
Trump’s argument is that the room that is currently the largest in the White House, the East Room, is not big enough for major ceremonies.
But there has been plenty of criticism about the new project and the way Trump has gone about it.
Specifically, he had not previously suggested that the East Wing would be entirely demolished to facilitate the new structure.
Here’s what else to know.
The cost has gone up
When Trump first proposed the idea of a new ballroom, he pegged the cost at $200 million. The sum has now increased to $300 million.
Asked about the increase at Thursday’s media briefing, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said:
“With any construction project, there are changes over time as you assess what the project is going to look like — and we’ll continue to keep you apprised of all of those changes. But just trust the process. This is going to be a magnificent addition to the White House for many years to come.”
Leavitt also emphasized a number of times that there would be no cost to taxpayers. That’s because Trump is soliciting private donations to build the ballroom.
The White House has released a list of donors. It includes prominent individuals such as Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Blackstone CEO Stephen Schwarzman. It also encompasses a number of corporations such as Amazon, Apple, Comcast, Google, Lockheed Martin, Microsoft and Palantir.
While those donors do indeed alleviate any burden on the taxpayers, critics have complained that the process opens the door for companies and individuals to throw money into the coffers in the hope of buying favor with the president.
The ballroom will be huge
The new ballroom is expected to be 90,000 square feet, which Trump has said will be enough to accommodate roughly 1,000 people. This is in stark contrast to the 200-person capacity of the East Room.
To be clear, the East Room is in the main, central structure of the White House and is unaffected by the demolition of the separate East Wing.
The new ballroom should obviate the need for use of tents on the South Lawn of the White House for big events.
However, some concerns have been expressed about the sheer size of the new structure. As The New York Times noted, its overall size is far greater than the executive residence, which clocks in at 55,000 square feet.
There are also more generalized concerns among Trump’s critics that the new structure will be crude or garish — the same complaints have shadowed him throughout his pre-politics career in real estate.
Democrats are appalled
It’s no surprise that the political reaction to Trump’s project has cleaved along partisan lines.
Democrats have blasted the new ballroom as a “vanity project,” as it was termed by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) has called the erasure of the East Wing “heartbreaking.”
The opposition party has also sought to cast Trump as fixated on the renovations while being cut off from more important concerns facing the nation at large.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) wrote on social media, “Oh you’re trying to say the cost of living is skyrocketing? Donald Trump can’t hear you over the sound of bulldozers demolishing a wing of the White House to build a new grand ballroom.”
Republicans, meanwhile, have mostly praised the project, or at least evinced a shoulder-shrugging casualness about it.
“You’ve got a builder who has [any] eye for construction and for excellence. What better person would you want to renovate the White House?” Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) told The Associated Press.
There’s a history of White House renovations — but that may not matter
Trump is far from the first president to make a significant change to the White House — a point that his aides have been eager to make in recent days.
In 1902, President Theodore Roosevelt oversaw major alterations, including the creation of what would ultimately become the East Wing.
The Oval Office itself only came into being in 1909, under President William Howard Taft. President Franklin Roosevelt created the modern iteration of the East Wing in 1942, and toward the end of the same decade, his successor President Harry S. Truman conducted a major renovation.
There have been plenty of other tweaks to the building by other presidents as well.
But none of that is likely to temper reactions to the current project, both because of the scale of the change and because of Trump’s massively polarizing political persona.
Broader political ramifications are hard to predict
It remains to be seen whether the project will have any real political impact beyond giving Trump critics one more point of complaint and his fans one more reason to celebrate.
On one hand, the decision to bulldoze the East Wing and put up a ballroom in its place, while debatable, hardly seems to rise close to the level of some of the Trump policies that most outrage his critics.
The millions of Americans who marched in ”No Kings” rallies last Saturday generally objected to far more fundamental matters — what they see as Trump’s authoritarian tendencies, his attacks on potential centers of dissent from the courts to the media, and the way Immigration and Customs Enforcement is acting in furtherance of his hard-line policy.
Even so, there is clearly a sensitivity in the administration about the potential downside of the images of destruction.
It has been reported by multiple outlets that the Treasury Department, whose headquarters provide a good vantage point over the scene where the East Wing once stood, has told its employees not to share photos.
The political danger is that the destruction of part of the most famous building in the nation comes to be seen as emblematic of Trump’s broader disregard for tradition, precedent and guardrails.
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) said during his marathon speech on the Senate floor this week that Trump was “tearing down a symbol of our Republic.”
Source: The Hill
Be First to Comment