Justice Roberts has given the go-ahead for continued construction of the vanity project ballroom, so any expectation that the full Supreme Court will rule agaionst it is likely unfounded. This would seem to say that a president can do whatever he wants with the White House and its environs. So any succeeding president could order the ballroom to be torn down. A Republican pres wouldn’t do it, but a Democrat could. Does anyone here think that would occur? If it were up to me, it would come down on the first day.
I dunno. Of all the myriad issues facing the U.S.A., White House renovations or denovations are pretty damn far down the list of Shit I Am Really Concerned About.
I hope the next Democratic president purges everything with Trump’s fingerprints on them. Put together a task force to make it happen swiftly and without the president having to waste time on it.
I feel the opposite. Just for the symbolism, I think all Trump’s garbage needs to go. Like toppling the statute of a dictator.
Yeah, about 99th out of 100. Big deal- meh. If the new ballroom turns out to be useful, why remove it? Just because trump built it? That is kinda petter and well…trump-like.
Well, OK. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. It just doesn’t move the needle for me. I should think the courts have more important things to worry about as well. It seems really a waste of resources. I think the White House did need a new ballroom or whatever it is. They historically were setting up tents on the lawn for decades now for these receptions, right? Would they have to go back to that in your demolition scenario?
The ballroom, like most other things in this era, point to the need for more ambitious structural reforms, especially of the courts. Dems should be thoughtful which things are worth the political capital of tearing down, but Trump been exploiting a decades long anti-constitutional coup launched by the heritage foundation, and we need to treat it as such.
If it actually gets built, no Democrat will tear it down out of spite, but will certainly repurpose the space.
However, if it turns out that the construction was half-assed or inspections were bribed away, that’s another story. Down it goes.
Or if a natural disaster were to severely damage it.
I agree with this. Would tearing down the ballroom be a symbolic? Yes it would be. But symbols matter. This would be no different than blowing up, and tearing down, all of the swastikas in post world WWII Germany.
I agree with this as well. I still don’t understand how the hell a president can just snap his fingers and make things like this happen. It may very well be true that the White House should have some sort of ballroom or other facility for official state functions. Welcoming heads of state from other countries etc…
But if that’s the case Trump’s ballroom would still need to be torn down. If a future president and Congress decide that this is a necessity or even a good idea then run it past a Congressional vote and get input from whatever nonpartisan departments deal with these sorts of situations. Trump should not be allowed to simply vandalize Washington DC and we leave all of his spray paint up everywhere like a cosplaying dictator or authoritarian.
The ways Trump things go…
Most likely not torn down, but rebuild it to a more functional building because I do expect that shoddy Trump contractors errors and cut corners will come to light.
As Donny would tell you, wrecking balls are entirely natural.
This requires an illegal no bid contract and would violate the Antideficiency Act. While a lot of Democrats would be fine with the idea that if Trump broke the law, we should break it back, there are a lot of other Democrats and independents who want lawless government to end on the first day of the next Democratic administration. I happen to be one of the latter.
If the Trump ballroom remains incomplete, and the Democrats have even the slightest House majority, and at least 50 Senate seats, it should be possible both politically and legislatively to start over and rebuild something similar to the historical East Wing.
But getting a Democratic president and House and Senate at the same time isn’t all that likely. And doing the job properly takes more time than doing it the Trump way. The Republicans will make hay over that.
I wonder if the best that can be done, in the short to medium run, is to repurpose the ballroom. I suggested before having the D.C. school district use it for events.
Detrumpification would be a real challenge. I do look forward to it.
I think this is relevant:
Emphasis mine.
I strongly suspect the 65 percent is misleading. But if close to true, the ballroom is going to be complete before the next Democratic president takes office. And that president is going to be pledged to stop illegal MAGA spending on vanity projects. Some will say that since the Republicans get away with it, so can we. But that’s one-term thinking.
So it is not a matter of the next Democratic President having guts. It’s a matter of whether the ballroom and arch are complete or not. If incomplete, tear down makes sense. If complete, not so much.
Donald Trump can’t even put a liner in a pool without screwing it up. I don’t doubt the ballroom or his vanity arch will be constructed with the same competence he’s demonstrated with everything else he’s touched over the years. That said, the Democrats, should they gain power, would best be served by making an honest assessment of the situation as it is and move on from there.
What would be brilliant is that a Democratic president names the ballroom after Obama or Biden.
I’ve seen footage of Obama dancing, but not Biden. So my vote goes to Barack, but because I’ve also seen Michelle dancing, the “Michelle and Barack Obama Ballroom” sounds fitting.
I have even seen Trump jerkily wave his arms around, but twitching to YMCA is not the style I’d expect in a ballroom.
Compare and contrast:
(4 min, 5 seconds)
(Mercifully, just 24 seconds)
I doubt there’s going to be any significant progress made on it in the next two years.
The ballroom should be repurposed as the HQ of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
If the ballroom is structurally sound, it would be way pettier (and probably lead to more voter backlash) to tear it down than to just rename it.
If the ballroom is structurally sound (I’d have my doubts), then carve it up into offices and conference spaces. Given that the First Lady’s traditional East Wing offices are gone, let the ballroom be hers to do with as she wishes.