President Donald Trump is planning to demolish the East Wing of the White House to build his planned 90,000 square foot, $300 million ballroom. This addition has received backlash due to its sizable contrast from the White House (which is only 55,000 square feet) and its private funding from donors Trump referred to as “friends of his” in a press conference.
According to a White House press release, the ballroom is “a transformative addition that will significantly increase the White House’s capacity to host major functions honoring world leaders, foreign nations, and other dignitaries.” The project is privately funded, with contributions from major corporations like Amazon, Apple, Google, Microsoft and Lockheed Martin.
But this project has become quite controversial. Former first lady Hillary Clinton stated that Trump was “destroying” the White House in a post on X. In a letter to the White House Staff Secretary William Scharf, the National Trust for Historic Preservation expressed concern that the ballroom will “overwhelm the White House itself” and “permanently disrupt the carefully balanced classical design of the White House.” Additionally, in the letter, the trust asked that Trump “pause demolition until plans for the proposed ballroom go through the legally required public review processes.”
Many are pointing out a lack of transparency from the administration. The initial statement of this project back in July claimed that the ballroom would be “substantially separated from the main building of the White House,” but this is no longer the case.
This project has created ethical concerns regarding destroying and renovating a national landmark, the President receiving private funding for personally important projects and his lack of transparency with the American people.
To expand upon the ethics and morals of the project, I spoke to Dr. Paul Bloomfield, a Professor of Philosophy at the University of Connecticut. Bloomfield is a specialist in moral philosophy and has published many articles and books on the subject.
One ethical concern regarding the private funding of this project is the president receiving donations from private donors.
“It puts those donors in a position in which the president is beholden to them in the future, so that the president might be tempted to do favors for them in an unjust procedure,” Bloomfield said.
Another concern is posed by the destruction of a national landmark as significant as the White House. Bloomfield says the presence of ethical compromise for the President to renovate the White House on “functional grounds” when the East Wing has had no functional issues since its construction in 1942.
Bloomfield also talked about the implications of photos of the renovations being censored.
“If there were no ethical problems, then the White House would not have tried to censor photographs of the destruction as it occurred,” Bloomfield said.
On the topic of transparency, Bloomfield claims that Trump’s actions and lack of communication with the American people undermine public trust and democratic accountability.
“Taking such drastic action in changing such sites without transparency or accountability to the public implies an illegitimate usurpation of ownership,” Bloomfield said.