The People's House is Changing. What These Changes Reveal About Democracy.
Published 8 days agoΒ β’Β 12 min read
β
Hello, Reader!
Bulldozers tore into the White House East Wing this week to make way for a new 90,000 sq. ft. ballroom--without independent review, without public input, and with funding from lawsuit settlements and corporate donors.
The Founders designed a system to prevent this, or at least they thought they did.
πΌοΈ The Big Picture
What's Happening: This week, the skyline around the White House shifted--literally. Crews began and completed their demolition of the East Wing to make way for a new 90,000-square-foot ballroom for 999 guests. The project cost has jumped from $200 million (July) to $300 million (October). β For more than two centuries, the White House has symbolized continuity in American life. Watching its familiar outline change invites a deeper question: how should the People's House evolve, and who should decide what that evolution looks like? [1]
β οΈ Why It Matters: The addition of the White House ballroom represents the first significant exterior change to the White House since 1942. And it represents three significant breaks from long-standing precedent:
1. Changed Oversight: The Trump Administration appointed a White House staffer to chair the National Capital Planning Commission. After his appointment, the Commission declared it lacked jurisdiction to oversee the East Wing's demolition or the ballroom's construction. [2]
2. Unclear Funding: Despite promises, the Trump Administration has not released a comprehensive donor list. The list it has released includes some donors, but does not provide a transparent accounting of their donations.
Funding includes $22 million from a lawsuit settlement between the President and Google. Other corporate donations have been made during fundraising events.[3]
3. Precedent Departure: For decades, presidents voluntarily submitted major White House renovations to independent review. The Trump Administration did not follow this precedent.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Society of Architectural Historians have called for an immediate halt to demolition, warning that the ballroom "will overwhelm the White House itself," and urging that plans "go through the legally required public review process." [4]
β
π What History Reveals: The White House has always balanced two identities: a private residence and public property. When George Washington selected James Hoban's design in 1792, he established a precedent where this building would be shaped through oversight and public accountability.
The current situation raises James Madison's question from Federalist No. 51: What happens when institutions designed to check power choose not to use that authority?
In July 1792, President George Washington sat down with three commissioners to review proposals for the President's House. At least nine architects had submitted designs. Washington selected Irish-born architect James Hoban's neoclassical design.
The choice was deliberate: a rejection of grandeur in favor of republican restraint.
Washington understood that architecture makes arguments. He refused to accept suggestions to become king and insisted on the title "Mr. President" rather than "His Excellency." He intended for the President's House to embody those same republican principles. The house would be modest enough to signal that the United States had no king.
Hoban based his design on Leinster House in Dublin (today's Irish Parliament seat).
Construction took eight years and employed both skilled European craftsmen and enslaved African Americans who quarried the Aquia Creek sandstone.
Washington personally supervised construction, even determining the exact placement of the north wall when foundation issues arose.
Washington never lived in the President's House. He left office in 1797, three years before its completion. [5]
Washington's restraint was intentional. Washington saw the President's House as belonging to the office, not to him personally. [6]
β
Thomas Jefferson: Access Over Grandeur (1801)
Thomas Jefferson had strong opinions about the President's House. Historians believe he even submitted an anonymous design for the President's House in 1792. But when Jefferson became president in 1801, he shaped the building's character through additions that reflected his democratic philosophy.
Like Washington, Jefferson wanted the President's House to be approachable, not like European palaces. His architectural renovations reflected his view and reinforced the message that the President's House was meant to serve the people.
Jefferson's Changes to the White House
Jefferson added low Palladian-style colonnades to connect the primary residence to working spaces (stables and storage) on its east and west sides.
He opened the President's House to regular public visitation on New Year's Day and Independence Day. In the early 1800s, citizens could freely walk around the President's House on these holidays. This accessibility was deliberate: a statement that the President's House belonged to the people.
Jefferson financed these additions from his own funds. He declined to accept money from the public, as he worried that accepting donations for these renovations might lead donors to expect political favors in return. [7]
Thomas Jefferson's White House Design, submitted 1792
Theodore Roosevelt's Oversight (1902)
Theodore Roosevelt built the West Wing and East Terrace in 1902 with Congressional appropriations and public oversight. Critics attacked him loudly. The Washington Times lamented his "modernization." It reported his addition destroyed the White House's historic value.
The debate happened openly. Congress appropriated funds. The public debated the merits of changing the White House. Public oversight functioned.
Roosevelt's East Wing restored Jefferson's act of opening the White House for visitation days. One New Year's Day reception saw Roosevelt shake 8,513 hands, and another public reception required the White House cloakroom to store 3,000 guests' coats. [8]
Franklin D. Roosevelt's 1942 East Wing expansion sparked controversy for deviating from standard oversight procedures. Built during World War II, FDR's construction of the East Wing included an undisclosed underground bunker, the Presidential Emergency Operations Center or PEOC.
Republicans accused Roosevelt of image-boosting rather than addressing genuine needs. Yet even during this wartime emergency, FDR had Congressional appropriations and legitimate security justifications. The precedent FDR set is that oversight matters, especially during crises. [9]
Every president from Jefferson through today has renovated the White House. What distinguishes renovations isn't whether they've happened, but how they're conducted and whether institutional checks on architectural preservation, enhancement, and budgets function.
At the Constitutional Convention in 1787, the Framers of the Constitution grappled with two intertwined dangers: Desire and greed.
On June 2, 1787, Benjamin Franklin proposed that the president receive no salary beyond expenses. He worried officials might use public office for personal gain, warning about two powerful influences on the affairs of men: ambition and avarice.
The Founders had watched royal governors accept "gifts" from favor-seekers and British officials grant contracts to supporters--corruption that undermined public trust.
James Madison worried about what would happen if institutional checks weren't used. His solution: "ambition must be made to counteract ambition" through constitutional checks and balances.[10]
What they didn't anticipate: Officials willing to subordinate institutional duties to personal loyalty, or public officials accepting massive funding from businesses with government interests.
The $300 Million Ballroom Reveals Both Fears:
Franklin's concern about avarice or greed: President Trump plans to use a $22 million legal settlement from Alphabet (Google's parent company) to help fund construction.
Corporate donors with government interests such as Lockheed Martin ($10 million), Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Meta, Google, plus Coinbase, Ripple, and Tether all attended a White House fundraising dinner and donated $5 million each. β George W. Bush's chief White House ethics lawyer Richard Painter calls this "use of public office for private gain" since donors "want something from the government" and are "paying for access." [11]
Where Institutional Checks Haven't Functioned As Designed:
The Trump Administration's promised comprehensive donor list lacks donation amounts and may be incomplete. β
The National Capital Planning Commission is chaired by someone whose primary job is serving the official they're supposed to oversee (the president). β
Decades of voluntary presidential submission to commission review were not followed in 2025.
The Treasury Department warned employees not to publicly share demolition photos.
What Makes 2025 Different: Historically, White House donations were documented and subject to ethics rules. This ballroom represents massive corporate funding from entities with direct federal interests, without consistent transparency guardrails.
β
π¬ Final Thought
John Adams inscribed a prayer in the State Dining Room that Franklin Roosevelt later carved into the mantel: "May none but Honest and Wise Men ever rule under This Roof."
Adams understood that the White House isn't just a building. It's a symbol. Each president is its temporary custodian, holding it in trust for the people.
Benjamin Franklin warned about ambition and avarice. Madison and his fellow Founders designed a system where ambition could counteract both. But the system only works when officials choose to use its tools.
The question: When institutions meant to provide oversight are led by those they're meant to oversee, when funding comes from those seeking government favor, and when transparency precedents are abandoned--is the fault in the Founders' design, or in those who choose not to honor its principles?
β
π§ Go Deeper
Explore the Founders' design of government institutions and the history of the White House with these episodes of Ben Franklin's World:
An Early History of the United States Congressβ βEpisode 202β Discover why the Constitution established a bicameral Congress and how the House of Representatives took shape during its early meetings, revealing the institutional structures the Founders designed to check executive power.
The Early History of Washington, D.C.β βEpisode 222β Explore how Congress came to build the nation's permanent capital on the Potomac River, George Washington's vision for the capital, and the ideas, money, and labor needed to build the District of Columbia.
An Early History of the White Houseβ βEpisode 265β Investigate the design, construction, and early history of the White House, including who built it, how presidents furnished it, and why the building was designed to serve four distinct purposes.
The Cabinetβ βEpisode 279β Explore how George Washington created the Cabinet as an advisory body and how it became a government institution, demonstrating how early presidents experimented with the structures of executive power.
The Early History of the United States Senateβ βEpisode 338β Examine the creation and formation of the United States Senate, including its powers, organization, and how divisive party politics influenced its work and eventually led to the modern-day filibuster.
β
π¬ What Do You Think?
The Founders believed transparency was essential to republican government.
When voluntary transparency norms are abandoned and official oversight bodies declare themselves to be without jurisdiction, what role should citizens play in demanding accountability?
You power this newsletterβand the effort to keep history in the headlines. π Support our work
β
P.S.
This week's newsletter issue was inspired by all of the emails you sent me this week. You told me about the East Wing demolition before I read about it in the news.
You asked for information about the history and architecture of the White House. You also asked for information about the government's checks and balances.
I hope this issue addresses both requests; if not, reply and let me know what you'd still like to know.
Affiliate Disclosure: Book links in this newsletter are affiliate links through Bookshop.org. If you purchase a book through these links, Ben Franklin's World earns a small commission at no extra cost to you. Your purchase helps support History Behind the Headlines and independent bookstores. Thank you for your support!
β