The White House, long admired for its stately presence and historical gravitas, is undergoing one of its most dramatic transformations in decades under President Donald Trump. By August 11, 2025, the president had already completed a controversial overhaul of the Rose Garden, replacing its lush lawn with a paved cement plaza. But that was only the beginning. In a move that has ignited passionate debate across the political spectrum, Trump has now set his sights on an even grander addition: a $200 million, 90,000-square-foot ballroom to be appended to the East Wing.
According to CNN, the Rose Garden renovation—completed just days ago—has been met with both curiosity and criticism. The garden, once a symbol of presidential tradition and natural beauty, is now a sprawling patio, reminiscent of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate. The president’s taste, it seems, favors opulence over restraint. The new cement plaza has replaced the iconic greenery, prompting many to ask: Is this the modernization the White House needs, or a step too far?
The answer may depend on whom you ask. As The Bulwark’s Mona Charen put it, Trump’s White House makeover is “both awful and fitting.” She described the president’s penchant for gilded décor—already visible in the Oval Office, now adorned with gold embellishments on the walls, ceiling, fireplace, and picture gallery—as “a cross between the robber barons of the Gilded Age and a castle monarchical feel.” For Charen, the latest plans for a ballroom are simply “one more eye-popping opportunity for wealthy people to buy access to this presidency.”
Trump’s ballroom proposal is not a new idea. As reported by CNN.com, he first floated the concept in 2010, only to have it rejected by then-President Barack Obama. Now, with construction slated to begin in September 2025, the president is poised to leave a physical imprint on the executive mansion that will outlast his time in office. The planned ballroom is nothing short of massive: at 90,000 square feet, it will dwarf the current 55,000-square-foot main building. Renderings displayed by White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt at a recent briefing show a white-and-gold structure, unmistakably Trumpian in its grandeur.
Supporters of the project point out that the White House has always evolved to meet the needs of its occupants. As The New York Sun noted in an editorial, “there’s a long roster of previous presidential occupants who sought to spruce up the venue.” Thomas Jefferson added colonnades; Teddy Roosevelt created the West Wing; Franklin Delano Roosevelt expanded the East Wing. Yet, as the editorial observed, none of those presidents succeeded in building a function space large enough for modern needs. The current reception room accommodates just 200 guests, forcing larger events into tents on the lawn—a setup that, as Trump himself has said, is “a disaster” when it rains.
The new ballroom, by contrast, will seat 650 people. According to the administration, it will be funded entirely by Trump and other private donors, with no taxpayer money involved. “Taxpayers shouldn’t have to spend a cent,” the White House insists. This funding model, however, has drawn skepticism. Christopher Bonanos, writing in Curbed, argued that the project is “just one more eye-popping opportunity for wealthy people to buy access to this presidency,” noting that “Trump rarely pays for anything if he can get someone else to do it.” The prospect of U.S. and overseas oligarchs footing the bill has fueled concerns about influence and access.
For critics, the ballroom is more than just a lavish party space—it’s a symbol of a broader shift in the White House’s identity. David Gardner, writing in The Daily Beast, lamented that the Founding Fathers “intended the government to be accountable to the people,” which is why George Washington rejected French architect Pierre Charles L’Enfant’s plan for a Versailles-like presidential residence. Instead, Washington opted for a more modest design that would foster civic pride. Gardner sees Trump’s vision as a repudiation of that tradition, transforming the “home of the republic” into “a showpiece for the very rich and privileged—and a memorial to himself.”
Not everyone is convinced that the changes spell disaster. Some point out that the White House has always reflected the tastes and priorities of its occupants. The addition of colonnades, wings, and even a chicken coop (as jokingly suggested by CNN’s NewsNight panelists) are part of a long tradition of presidential upgrades. Yet few changes have been as visually and symbolically significant as those underway now.
Beyond the ballroom, Trump’s approach to White House décor has been nothing if not vigorous. The Oval Office’s transformation, with its gold embellishments and opulent flourishes, has drawn comparisons to the palaces of European monarchs. Critics argue that these choices are out of step with the White House’s role as the “people’s house.” Supporters, however, see them as a reflection of Trump’s unique style and a willingness to break with convention.
The debate over the ballroom’s funding highlights deeper questions about access and influence. While the administration insists that no public funds will be used, the reliance on private donors—many of them wealthy and potentially seeking favor—has raised eyebrows. “It’s all deeply un-American,” Gardner wrote, expressing concern that the White House is becoming less a seat of democratic government and more a playground for the privileged.
As for the practicalities, the new ballroom will address a longstanding need for a larger event space. The current limitations have forced the White House to rely on temporary tents, which are far from ideal for high-profile gatherings. The new venue, with seating for 650 and all the amenities expected of a world-class function space, will undoubtedly change the way the White House hosts everything from state dinners to press briefings.
Trump’s defenders argue that he is simply exercising his prerogative as president to shape the White House in his image. “What is next, a moat and a drawbridge?” one commentator quipped, only half in jest. For better or worse, the changes now underway will leave an indelible mark on the executive mansion—and on the nation’s collective memory.
With construction set to begin next month, the debate is far from over. Whether the new ballroom will be seen as a bold modernization or a monument to excess remains to be seen. For now, one thing is clear: the White House, like the country it represents, is always in the process of becoming something new.