For months, Donald Trump has been touting his ballroom project for the White House. This week, American citizens have the opportunity to say what they think.
Published at
The verdict? They are not happy.
More than 35,000 citizens commented on President Trump’s plan at the National Capital Planning Commission in advance of Thursday’s hearings.
These opinions can be consulted on the Commission’s website. More than 97% of them are negative.
This is a stark contrast to Mr. Trump, who says his plan is popular and necessary.
PHOTO JON ELSWICK, ASSOCIATED PRESS ARCHIVES
Plans and sketches of the project for the new White House ballroom
The commission – the majority of the 12 members are Republicans and six were appointed by Mr. Trump – is scheduled to vote on the ballroom project on April 2. The White House said it plans to begin above-ground construction of the ballroom as early as next month.
“The People’s House”
The National Trust for Historic Preservation, an agency mandated by Congress to preserve historic buildings, filed a lawsuit in December to block the ballroom project, arguing that Americans did not have a chance to comment on Trump’s changes before the president demolished part of a building known as “The People’s House.”
About a quarter of the comments echo criticism first submitted by writer Anara Guard, which was amplified in a Facebook post by Sara Paretsky, a mystery writer. Around 10,000 reviews seem to repeat a phrase from Mme Guard: “I oppose the spending of $300 million on this project, which was launched without the proper authorization, permits or design review. »
According to Mme Paretsky, who says he often criticizes the president’s policies on social media, Mr. Trump’s demolition of the East Wing of the White House struck a nerve.
I think people felt as viscerally attacked as if their own homes had been razed. In a sense, it is symbolically our home.
Sarah Paretsky
Most Americans oppose Donald Trump’s ballroom (58% against, 25% for, according to an Economist/YouGov poll in February).
According to the National Capital Planning Commission, the 35,000 comments received on this project are a high in recent years.
PHOTO MARK SCHIEFELBEIN, ASSOCIATED PRESS ARCHIVES
Donald Trump speaking about his ballroom project March 2 at the White House
Their authors include: architects questioning whether the ballroom’s designers are following the profession’s code of conduct, which calls for protecting historic assets; elected officials in Congress demanding answers about the scale and scope of the project; longtime Republicans declaring themselves supporters of Mr. Trump, but unhappy with his treatment of the iconic building that is the White House.
“I voted for Trump three times. But I didn’t vote for that,” said Jim Cunningham, a Republican who served as a municipal official in his hometown of Media, Pennsylvania. “Trump is only a temporary occupant of the White House. It belongs to the American people. She’s not his. »
Former White House staff members also gave their opinions.
Deborah Sloan, who worked in the East Wing from 1969 to 1972 under Richard Nixon as an assistant to White House social secretary Lucy Winchester, contradicts Mr. Trump when he claims the White House should include a 1,000-seat room for receptions.
A smaller room for more privacy
Mme Sloan, 80, says she was “closely involved” in planning state dinners, Christmas parties and first lady Pat Nixon’s “Evenings at the White House,” which featured popular entertainers like Johnny Cash, Sammy Davis Jr. and Merle Haggard. The State Dining Room, which seats 140 guests, was almost always sufficient. There was also the large East Room which could accommodate 50 more people for shows or dancing after the meal.
The relatively small size conveyed the special nature of the event, she believes: “The magic of a state dinner is the intimacy that guests feel when they are in the presence of the President of the United States, not having to wait in line when arriving with 500 or 1,000 people,” she says.
At the same time, rare comments support Mr. Trump and his ballroom.
PHOTO JON ELSWICK, ASSOCIATED PRESS ARCHIVES
A plan of the new White House ballroom desired by Donald Trump
“Our White House has been burned, rebuilt, expanded and modernized over the decades to keep the building functional and safe for our national government and the occupants within it. This is how you save historic structures: by keeping them viable and adapting them to modern uses and needs,” wrote Alabama citizen Anne Nieman.
But according to most citizens who expressed their opinion, Mr. Trump is not saving the White House, he is destroying it.
Mme Sloan and Penny Adams, a colleague of his in the White House from 1969 to 1973, demanded that the Commission reject the project and order White House planners to create a replica of the East Wing. And if commissioners authorize a ballroom, it should be a much less massive version than the proposed structure so that it doesn’t appear to crush “this iconic symbol of America.”
Others go much further.
If the ballroom is built, “I would like to see it torn down,” M saidme Paretsky, who protests that it seems twice as big as the rest of the White House. She describes the ballroom as a “huge tumor.” »
This article was published in the Washington Post.
Read the original version (in English; subscription required)
