Experts raise concerns over Trump's White House ballroom renovation plans
A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday.
Enter Email
Sign Up
The White House, the Supreme Court building, the Capitol, and all their 'related buildings and grounds' are exempt from the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, which requires federal agencies to assess and mitigate adverse effects to historic properties and seek consultation through a formal review process.
Advertisement
Instead, the White House has its own committee that provides advice on the 'preservation and the interpretation of the museum character' of the building. The Committee for the Preservation of the White House — chaired by the director of the National Park Service — is made up of several federal officials and a number of members appointed by the president.
Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff, said Thursday in a news release that the administration was 'fully committed to working with the appropriate organizations to preserving the special history of the White House.'
Advertisement
Still, the committee's recommendations are not binding, giving the president significant leeway to do as he wishes. 'In most cases, you're not going to have a lot of binding obligations to historic buildings,' said Michael Spencer, a professor of historic preservation at the University of Mary Washington.
The sheer scale of the project — a giant ballroom attached to the East Wing — worries preservationists. 'It could do some harm to the property overall,' said Richard Longstreth, professor of American studies at George Washington University. 'There aren't any checks and balances here, unfortunately.'
Spencer said his expectations on preservation were 'pretty low.'
'We're oftentimes viewed as getting in the way of progress, and I would say in this particular instance, you've got a lot of strong personalities and they're under no obligation to really follow best practices as preservation puts forth,' he said.
Jonathan Jarvis, former director of the National Park Service, which is responsible for the upkeep of the White House and its grounds, said any additions made to the White House must follow the architectural design of the building. 'You couldn't put something on the side of the building that doesn't match it historically in terms of its architecture, coloration, and style,' he said.
He cast doubt on the timeline the Trump administration proposed, calling its plans to finish a project of this scale by the end of Trump's term 'optimistic.'
'You don't see one of those projects go that fast,' he said. 'It'll be a rush to get it done.'
Advertisement
Jarvis, who was the director of the National Park Service from 2009 to 2017, said construction at the White House is a 'complicated process' because it is 'not just normal construction.'
'It's the White House — it has to survive a terrorist attack,' he said. He added that every step of the process would need to be evaluated to ensure that nothing 'is being compromised architecturally or from a security standpoint.'
Stewart D. McLaurin, president of the White House Historical Association, said the White House has gone through numerous changes to its interior and exterior since the cornerstone was laid in 1792, and many of them faced resistance. He said many of those changes made the White House what it is today.
'The South Portico, the North Portico, the East Wing, the West Wing, and the Truman Balcony all raised concerns at the time — but today, we can't imagine the White House without these iconic elements,' he said.
It remains unclear whether the Committee for the Preservation of the White House, which works in tandem with the White House Historical Association, has provided recommendations or raised concerns about Trump's ballroom. A spokesperson for the historical association, Jessica Fredericks, did not respond to questions about the committee's position on the project.
In addition to the director of the National Park Service, the committee is composed of representatives from the White House, the Smithsonian Institution, the Commission of Fine Arts, the National Gallery of Art, and a handful of presidential appointees.
Trump has not nominated a park service director, a position that requires Senate confirmation, or announced the appointments of individuals to serve on the committee. The terms of 13 individuals that former President Joe Biden appointed to the committee in 2023 expired when Trump began his second term, according to a government database. Jessica Bowron, the comptroller of the National Park Service, is currently serving as its acting director.
Advertisement
The president tapped McCrery Architects as the lead architect of the project. James McCrery, the company's founding principal architect, was appointed by Trump in 2019 to serve a four-year term on the Commission of Fine Arts. He called the ballroom a necessary addition to the White House, where presidents have 'faced challenges hosting major events.'
McCrery said he would preserve 'the elegance of its classical design and historical importance' of the White House.
Questions about who is funding the project are also still largely unanswered. White House officials said the president and 'other patriot donors' would pay for the renovations but declined to give details.
This article originally appeared in
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
9 minutes ago
- Axios
Trump, Murdoch agree to pause WSJ case deposition until after dismissal ruling
President Trump and Rupert Murdoch reached a deal Monday to postpone the media mogul's deposition in a libel lawsuit related to the Wall Street Journal publishing a report on an Epstein birthday book, per court filings. Why it matters: Trump's lawyers had raised concerns about Murdoch's age and health when they asked a federal court in Florida last week to expedite the 94-year-old's deposition, but the deal postpones this until after the outlet's upcoming motion to dismiss the case. Now, neither Murdoch nor the 79-year-old Trump are likely to be deposed for months, per Politico's Josh Gerstein, who first reported on Monday's filing in Miami. Zoom in: "Until Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Complaint is adjudicated, the Parties agree not to engage in discovery," according to the filing. If the WSJ's motion to dismiss Trump's lawsuit is denied, Murdoch would appear in person for a deposition within 30 days of such a ruling. Murdoch must provide a sworn declaration about his current health condition within three days of a court order approving the agreement and the Australian-born mogul has agreed to provide regular updates on his health, per the filing. Driving the news: Trump is suing Murdoch, the WSJ, its owner Dow Jones, its parent company News Corp. and others over the Journal report last month about a " bawdy" birthday letter" that the outlet said bore the president's name.
Boston Globe
39 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Texas dispute highlights nation's long history of partisan gerrymandering. Is it legal?
Who is responsible for gerrymandering? In many states, like Texas, the state legislature is responsible for drawing congressional districts, subject to the approval or veto of the governor. District maps must be redrawn every 10 years, after each census, to balance the population in districts. But in some states, nothing prevents legislatures from conducting redistricting more often. In an effort to limit gerrymandering, some states have entrusted redistricting to special commissions composed of citizens or bipartisan panels of politicians. Democratic officials in some states with commissions are now talking of trying to sidestep them to counter Republican redistricting in Texas. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up How does a gerrymander work? Advertisement If a political party controls both the legislature and governor's office — or has such a large legislative majority that it can override vetoes — it can effectively draw districts to its advantage. One common method of gerrymandering is for a majority party to draw maps that pack voters who support the opposing party into a few districts, thus allowing the majority party to win a greater number of surrounding districts. Another common method is for the majority party to dilute the power of an opposing party's voters by spreading them among multiple districts. Why is it called gerrymandering? The term dates to 1812, when Massachusetts Gov. Elbridge Gerry signed a bill redrawing state Senate districts to benefit the Democratic-Republican Party. Some thought an oddly shaped district looked like a salamander. A newspaper illustration dubbed it 'The Gerry-mander' — a term that later came to describe any district drawn for political advantage. Gerry lost re-election as governor in 1812 but won election that same year as vice president with President James Madison. Advertisement Is political gerrymandering illegal? Not under the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court, in a 2019 case originating from North Carolina, ruled that federal courts have no authority to decide whether partisan gerrymandering goes too far. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote: 'The Constitution supplies no objective measure for assessing whether a districting map treats a political party fairly.' The Supreme Court noted that partisan gerrymandering claims could continue to be decided in state courts under their own constitutions and laws. But some state courts, including North Carolina's highest court, have ruled that they also have no authority to decide partisan gerrymandering claims. Are there any limits on redistricting? Yes. Though it's difficult to challenge legislative districts on political grounds, the Supreme Court has upheld challenges on racial grounds. In a 2023 case from Alabama, the high court said the congressional districts drawn by the state's Republican-led Legislature likely violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting the voting strength of Black residents. The court let a similar claim proceed in Louisiana. Both states subsequently redrew their districts. What does data show about gerrymandering? Statisticians and political scientists have developed a variety of ways to try to quantify the partisan advantage that may be attributable to gerrymandering. Republicans, who control redistricting in more states than Democrats, used the 2010 census data to create a strong gerrymander. An Associated Press analysis of that decade's redistricting found that Republicans enjoyed a greater political advantage in more states than either party had in the past 50 years. Advertisement But Democrats responded to match Republican gerrymandering after the 2020 census. The adoption of redistricting commissions also limited gerrymandering in some states. An AP analysis of the 2022 elections — the first under new maps — found that Republicans won just one more U.S. House seat than would have been expected based on the average share of the vote they received nationwide. That was one of the most politically balanced outcomes in years.
San Francisco Chronicle
39 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump pressures China and India to stop buying cheap Russian oil
U.S. President Donald Trump is pushing China and India to stop buying oil from Russia and helping fund the Kremlin's war against Ukraine. Trump is raising the issue as he seeks to press Russian President Vladimir Putin to agree to a ceasefire. But cheap Russian oil benefits refiners in those countries as well as meeting their needs for energy, and they're not showing any inclination to halt the practice. Three countries are big buyers of Russian oil China, India and Turkey are the biggest recipients of oil that used to go to the European Union. The EU's decision to boycott most Russian seaborne oil from January 2023 led to a massive shift in crude flows from Europe to Asia. Since then China has been the No. 1 overall purchaser of Russian energy since the EU boycott, with some $219.5 billion worth of Russian oil, gas and coal, followed by India with $133.4 billion and Turkey with $90.3 billion. Before the invasion, India imported relatively little Russian oil. Hungary imports some Russian oil through a pipeline. Hungary is an EU member, but President Viktor Orban has been critical of sanctions against Russia. The lure of cheaper oil One big reason: It's cheap. Since Russian oil trades at a lower price than international benchmark Brent, refineries can fatten their profit margins when they turn crude into usable products such as diesel fuel. Russia's oil earnings are substantial despite sanctions The Kyiv School of Economics says Russia took in $12.6 billion from oil sales in June. Russia continues to earn substantial sums even as the Group of Seven leading industrialized nations has tried to limit Russia's take by imposing an oil price cap. The cap is to be enforced by requiring shipping and insurance companies to refuse to handle oil shipments above the cap. Russia has to a great extent been able to evade the cap by shipping oil on a 'shadow fleet' of old vessels using insurers and trading companies located in countries that are not enforcing sanctions. Russian oil exporters are predicted to take in $153 billion this year, according to the Kyiv institute. Fossil fuels are the single largest source of budget revenue. The imports support Russia's ruble currency and help Russia to buy goods from other countries, including weapons and parts for them.
