Critics are outraged over President Trump’s demolition of the East Wing to make way for his $300 million ballroom. Others say it was time for change.
www.nytimes.com
“… Not everyone was nostalgic.
Gahl Hodges Burt, who was social secretary for three years under President Ronald Reagan, said that tearing down the East Wing to make space for the ballroom was an unfortunate necessity, and that change was overdue. Since the State Dining Room holds only 140 seated guests and the East Room has space for 200 at most, recent administrations have taken to erecting enormous tents on the South Lawn for ever larger state dinners.
“Putting up a tent does nothing but make people upset that they’ve come to a state dinner but they never get inside the White House,” Ms. Burt said.
“The only bathroom facilities for a tent are porta-potties. Setting up a kitchen out there is hugely expensive. When the tent is up, the helicopter can’t land. And the grass dies.” (Ms. Burt was referring to the presidential helicopter, Marine One.)
… Mr. LaRosa, who agreed with Ms. Burt that a ballroom was needed to replace the behemoth tents — “the French have the Élysée Palace and here we are having a lawn party” — said he had fond memories of Dr. Biden bringing Willow, the family cat, to her office.
… The East Wing never had the political importance or cachet of the West Wing, which houses the Oval Office. But it became prominent, and controversial, in its rebuilding during World War II, when Republicans denounced the cost as wasteful. Constructed as a two-story wing in the same neoclassical style as the White House, it covered up Roosevelt’s new underground shelter.
“The secretive nature of the construction, tied to military purposes, further fueled suspicions,” Stewart McLaurin, the president of the White House Historical Association, wrote on the group’s website. “However, the East Wing’s utility in supporting the modern presidency eventually quieted critics.’’
