Opposition to White House Ballroom Construction and Taxpayer Funding

I am writing as your constituent to express my firm opposition to both the construction of a new ballroom on the White House grounds and the proposed use of federal funds to pay for it. This project was explicitly presented to the American people as an entirely privately funded endeavor that would cost taxpayers nothing. To pivot now toward a federal appropriation of $400 million—specifically by diverting hundreds of millions in "customs fees"—represents a fundamental breach of transparency and a failure of fiscal accountability. My opposition is grounded in the following factual and procedural concerns: - Breach of Public Trust and Administrative Mismanagement: The project’s cost has doubled to $400 million since its inception. Utilizing the Power of the Purse to bail out an over-budget project that was promised to be self-sustaining is a fiscally irresponsible use of Article I authority. - Procedural and Aesthetic Irregularity: The construction of a massive, modern ballroom on the historic White House grounds represents a significant departure from standard preservation and approval protocols for the Executive Residence. At a time when the nation faces critical infrastructure and economic challenges, prioritizing luxury event space is a documented failure to align legislative action with the actual needs of the American people. - Misappropriation of "Security" Justifications: Proponents are attempting to frame this expansion as a "national security necessity" in response to recent events. However, the claim that a luxury ballroom is a vital security requirement is not supported by any public risk assessment. Funneling taxpayer money into a gala space under the guise of security sets a dangerous precedent for executive overreach. I urge you to reject any stand-alone bill or reconciliation rider that authorizes taxpayer funding for this project and to oppose the construction itself as a non-essential use of historic grounds. I will be monitoring your record on this issue as a litmus test for your commitment to fiscal accountability and the rule of law.