So Many Questions: Damaging the White House

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

For architects, the wanton destruction of the East Wing, including the colonnade designed by Thomas Jefferson and the wing itself designed by McKim Mead & White (though considerably bowdlerized) is a national tragedy, even though in the scheme of today’s political horrors it is far from the worst. Of course for everyone else the White House, along with the Capitol, is the symbol of America, its image on the back of every $20 bill. Trump intends to leave a permanent mark on Washington by throwing up a bloated East Wing. (This earlier post lays out the damage if you were not following the story as the excavators completed their work.)

The house does not belong to him, but to the American people and such a substantial, irreversible alteration requires the approval of the National Capital Planning Commission, which exists, along with other official guardians of Washington’s Monumental Core precisely to avoid damaging changes at the whim of the President or anyone else. (The degree to which NCPC review is binding on the executive branch appears to be fuzzy, it should be noted.)

The Royal Hall of Favor Seeking

If Trump can drastically alter the White House on a whim, can’t his successors just tear it down for their own reasons? Maybe that would temper Trump’s urge to put his own paw print on everything. I’m not holding my breath.

A properly deliberate process would entail drawing up a thorough assessment of what the building needs, and rationally establishing a set of priorities, and seeking funding in a transparent, disinterested manner (“disinterested” not being a term in the Trump vocabulary). Any alterations should meet a demonstrated need.

https://www.postalley.org/2025/11/08/so-many-questions-damaging-the-white-house/