A $300 million ballroom renovation in the White House has sparked outrage among historians and preservationists. President Trump's plan to build a 8,400-square-meter ballroom will require demolishing the East Wing. While some argue that this is an unprecedented move, others point to the Obama administration's $376 million White House renovation in 2010.
The CNN reported on the Obama administration's renovation which aimed to improve the building's infrastructure. It involved largely underground utility work and was approved by Congress after a government report identified needed upgrades to water pipes and electrical systems. The changes improved heating, cooling, and fire alarm systems that hadn't been updated since 1902 or 1934.
However, Trump's proposal has significant differences from the Obama administration's project. For instance, while Obama's renovation was largely focused on interior changes, Trump's plan involves demolishing a large part of the East Wing. Historic preservationists argue that such a change should follow a rigorous design and review process.
Moreover, unlike the Obama administration's project, which was fully funded by taxpayer money, Trump's $300 million ballroom is being funded through donations from corporations like Amazon, Google, Meta, and Microsoft. Critics point to this as an example of Trump's lack of transparency in his plans for the White House renovations.
The Society of Architectural Historians has stated that significant changes to a historic building like the White House should be subject to rigorous review and consideration of public views and concerns about preservation. Sara Bronin, a professor at George Washington University Law School, noted that Trump's project is "unprecedented in all the wrong ways."
While some defenders argue that Trump's plan is not unprecedented, pointing to Obama's renovation as an example of similar projects, historians argue that these two cases are distinct due to their scale and impact on historic buildings.
The CNN reported on the Obama administration's renovation which aimed to improve the building's infrastructure. It involved largely underground utility work and was approved by Congress after a government report identified needed upgrades to water pipes and electrical systems. The changes improved heating, cooling, and fire alarm systems that hadn't been updated since 1902 or 1934.
However, Trump's proposal has significant differences from the Obama administration's project. For instance, while Obama's renovation was largely focused on interior changes, Trump's plan involves demolishing a large part of the East Wing. Historic preservationists argue that such a change should follow a rigorous design and review process.
Moreover, unlike the Obama administration's project, which was fully funded by taxpayer money, Trump's $300 million ballroom is being funded through donations from corporations like Amazon, Google, Meta, and Microsoft. Critics point to this as an example of Trump's lack of transparency in his plans for the White House renovations.
The Society of Architectural Historians has stated that significant changes to a historic building like the White House should be subject to rigorous review and consideration of public views and concerns about preservation. Sara Bronin, a professor at George Washington University Law School, noted that Trump's project is "unprecedented in all the wrong ways."
While some defenders argue that Trump's plan is not unprecedented, pointing to Obama's renovation as an example of similar projects, historians argue that these two cases are distinct due to their scale and impact on historic buildings.
I gotta say, $300 million for a ballroom renovation is wild 
! I mean, I get it, the Obamas did some major work back in 2010 but at least they were transparent about funding it with taxpayer money 
. Trump's plan to demolish part of the East Wing just seems reckless to me 
. And what's up with these corporate donations?! It feels like he's trying to whitewash some serious questions about his plans 
. I'm all for updates and improvements but let's be real, the White House is a historic landmark 
. Can't we just preserve it in its original glory instead of tearing parts down? 
... I mean, I get why ppl are upset, Trump's plan is super different from Obama's renovation, right? Like Obama's was all about upgrading the interior stuff, but Trump wants to demolish a huge part of the East Wing 
Sara Bronin makes a good point that Trump's plan is "unprecedented in all the wrong ways". Can we get some more info on how this whole thing is going down tho? 
. I get that Trump's plan is gonna be HUGE, but can't we just preserve some of that history instead? Like, isn't the White House already iconic enough without all these changes 
in trump right now!!! he's just gonna ruin the white house like that?! first off, $300 million is insane 
which btw is probably just gonna be some fancy party space anyway. and it's not even like it's being fully funded by taxpayer money, it's all coming from corps like amazon and google 
it's so frustrating as a fan of the usa 
i wish someone would take care of our white house like it's supposed to be taken care of 
. But what I find really interesting (and concerning) is that Trump is funding this through corporate donations 
It feels like he's being super secretive about where the money's coming from and who gets to decide on these changes 
. We need to make sure that our cultural heritage is preserved, not just for future generations, but also for ourselves 
.
. I think it's crazy to demolish part of the East Wing just to build a huge new room 
. Can't we just preserve what we have instead? 
The fact that corporations are funding this project through donations is also weird 
I remember when Obama did the White House renovation in 2010 and it was a big deal too, but at least his was done with taxpayer money 
, not some corporate donors like Amazon and Google 