President Donald Trump wants a permanent ballroom at the White House, and the Democratic left and its media chorus have spent months turning it into a personality test.
The question keeps coming back: Will Trump get his ballroom?
The wording tells you plenty. The project is treated first as a Donald Trump indulgence and only later, if at all, as an improvement to a building that has been altered, expanded, rebuilt, and modernized by presidents for more than two centuries.
The White House plan calls for roughly 90,000 square feet of event space with seating for 650 people. The East Room seats about 200. Large state functions can require a temporary tent about 100 yards from the main entrance. Federal planners describe the new facility as a permanent, secure event space designed to increase capacity for official state functions.
For 150 years, Presidents, Administrations, and White House Staff have longed for a large event space on the White House complex that can hold substantially more guests than currently allowed. President Donald J. Trump has expressed his commitment to solving this problem on behalf of future Administrations and the American people.
The White House is one of the most beautiful and historic buildings in the world, yet the White House is currently unable to host major functions honoring world leaders and other countries without having to install a large and unsightly tent approximately 100 yards away from the main building entrance. The White House State Ballroom will be a much-needed and exquisite addition of approximately 90,000 total square feet of ornately designed and carefully crafted space, with a seated capacity of 650 people — a significant increase from the 200-person seated capacity in the East Room of the White House.
In recent weeks, President Trump has held several meetings with members of the White House Staff, the National Park Service, the White House Military Office, and the United States Secret Service to discuss design features and planning.
Trump won't be packing it into a moving truck when his term ends. Every president who follows him would inherit it.
History should make the current outrage harder to sustain. Thomas Jefferson added colonnades. Theodore Roosevelt demolished the old conservatories and built what became the West Wing. Franklin Roosevelt expanded the East Wing in 1942. Harry Truman oversaw a renovation so extensive that workers gutted the interior of the Executive Mansion and rebuilt it inside the original exterior walls.
From the White House Historical Association:
Under President Andrew Jackson, the White House gained one of its most iconic features: the North Portico. Added in 1829–1830, this grand entrance, designed by architect James Hoban, addressed the building’s lack of a formal entryway on its northern side. The portico, with its imposing columns, aligned with the South Portico also added by President James Monroe after the original White House was rebuilt from the British fire, and gave the White House a more balanced and stately appearance.
The North Portico’s construction, for which Congress appropriated $24,729 (approximately $850,000 today), was controversial due to it being proposed during a period of economic downturn. The United States Telegraph criticized Jackson for prioritizing grandeur over the needs of ordinary citizens, portraying the portico as a symbol of his populist yet paradoxically lavish presidency. In Congress, Whig opponents questioned the expenditure, arguing that the funds could have been better spent on infrastructure or debt reduction. Some critics also felt the portico’s classical design was too ostentatious for a democratic republic. Nevertheless, the North Portico became a defining feature, now synonymous with the public face of the White House.
President Chester Arthur, known for his refined tastes, undertook a lavish redecoration of the White House interior in 1881–1883, hiring designer Louis Comfort Tiffany to transform its public rooms. Tiffany introduced vibrant colors, ornate furnishings, and stained-glass screens, replacing the outdated and worn decor of previous decades with a high Victorian aesthetic.
Arthur’s redecoration was met with mixed reactions. The New York Times praised the aesthetic improvements but criticized the $110000 cost (nearly $3,500,000 today), calling it extravagant for a public building; indeed, it was the largest cost spent on the White House since its reconstruction after the War of 1812. Critics in the press, including Harper’s Weekly, accused Arthur of turning the White House into a “palace” unfit for a democratic leader. In Congress, Democrats decried the expenditure as wasteful, especially given Arthur’s reputation as a political machine insider. The Tiffany decorations were later removed or modified by subsequent presidencies, reflecting shifting tastes, but the controversy highlighted the tension between modernization and fiscal restraint.
Presidents kept going. Truman added his balcony despite furious objections. Richard Nixon converted FDR's indoor swimming pool into the press briefing room. Gerald Ford added an outdoor pool. The White House Americans recognize today is the product of generations of presidents changing it to meet new needs.
Criticism isn't new either. Theodore Roosevelt was accused of damaging the White House's historic character. FDR's East Wing drew charges of waste and secrecy. Truman's balcony was attacked as a personal indulgence.
Many of the features once denounced are now defended as treasured pieces of White House history.
Yet Trump's ballroom is routinely described by opponents as a "vanity project," "gaudy," and an affront to the People's House. A group of 143 members of Congress joined an effort this spring to stop it, while Democratic leaders have worked to make the project a political symbol.
U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW); Representative Robert Garcia (D-CA-42), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform; and Representative Jared Huffman (D-CA-02), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Natural Resources, led 143 Members of Congress in submitting an amicus brief to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in the case of National Trust For Historic Preservation In The United States v. National Park Service et al. The brief challenged President Trump’s illegal demolition of the White House East Wing and urged the court to stop the Trump Administration from illegally constructing a massive billion-dollar ballroom.
“Senate Democrats were able to knock taxpayer funding for Republicans’ gilded ballroom out of the reconciliation bill, but the law is clear that the entire project is illegal,” said Whitehouse.
“While working families are told there’s no money for affordable housing, healthcare, or lowering everyday costs, President Trump is building a billion-dollar ballroom. Everyone should be disgusted by his illegal and unconstitutional vanity project. We are fighting this in court,” said Garcia.
“Donald Trump looked at a country full of people working hard and still falling behind, and he decided what America needed was a gaudy ballroom. Now he is reaching into the pockets of working families for crystal chandeliers and gold trim while Americans are told to tighten their belts. The White House does not belong to Donald Trump and his billionaire buddies. We are fighting this in court,” said Huffman.
The Constitution grants Congress, not the President, exclusive power to determine when and if federal property should be constructed, renovated, or demolished. “Whereas the President lives in the White House for only a finite period while in office, the Constitution entrusts Congress, acting for the people, with making long-term decisions about the ‘People’s House’ …. Allowing the President to demolish an entire wing of the White House and rebuild it to his liking, while entirely bypassing Congress’s constitutional role and ignoring express statutory prohibition, disrupts the balance of powers put in place by the nation’s Framers,” wrote the lawmakers in the brief.
As the lawmakers pointed out, Congress alone holds the power to authorize and appropriate funds before any project begins. Congress never authorized or funded the demolition of the East Wing or the construction of Trump’s ballroom in its stead. The Administration’s “actions infringe on Congress’s authority, seizing for the President legislative power the Constitution reserves to Congress and violating the constitutional separation of powers,” wrote the lawmakers.
The lawmakers concluded, “The President cannot undertake any construction at the White House—much less demolish one of its wings—without clear authorization from Congress, as well as an appropriation of funds to do so. Here, Congress neither authorized the demolition and reconstruction of the East Wing nor appropriated funds necessary for that project.”
Trump certainly makes it easy for them. The man likes grandeur, gold, and big construction projects. He rarely shows much interest in pretending otherwise. None of those traits change the practical question sitting underneath all the noise.
Does the White House need a larger, permanent, secure place for state dinners and major official events?
Federal planners say the project provides exactly that function. History says presidents have repeatedly reshaped the White House when its needs changed. Future presidents, Republicans and Democrats alike, would use the space.
So why has a ballroom become another national emergency?
Because Donald Trump wants it.
Trump Derangement Syndrome has reached the point where agreement itself can look like surrender. A useful idea can't simply be useful if Trump proposed it. A White House improvement can't simply be an improvement if Trump designed it.
In due time, his critics may have to confront an unbearable possibility.
Maybe Donald Trump is right.
PJ Media VIP gives you more of the stories and commentary the legacy press would rather ignore. Right now, use promo code FIGHT and get 60% off your VIP membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member