Representative Eric Swalwell of California has now reportedly made the latest salvo in a growing political effort among Democrats to challenge changes made to the White House under President Donald J. Trump.
In a message shared on X on Sunday, Mr. Swalwell declared that any Democrat seeking the presidency must be prepared to “take a wrecking ball to the Trump Ballroom on DAY ONE,” a reference to the massive new addition currently under construction at the East Wing.
It is an unusually stark pledge that seeks to rally the left around removing what Democrats have cast as a symbol of Trump-era excess. “Or, as @RubenGallego proposes, rename it the Barack Obama Ballroom,” Mr. Swalwell suggested. “But a Trump monument to corruption will not stand.”
The ballroom project — a 90,000-square-foot structure capable of hosting roughly 1,000 guests — took shape after the demolition of the former East Wing over the course of a single week.
The speed of the construction, and its unprecedented scale, have drawn scrutiny from Trump critics even as the administration celebrates it as a necessary modernization.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the addition, calling it “a much-needed and exquisite addition.” According to Ms. Leavitt, the United States has been limited in its ability to host major foreign dignitary events without erecting “a large and unsightly tent approximately 100 yards away from the main building’s entrance.” The new ballroom, she argued, solves that problem.
Mr. Trump has said the entire cost — reportedly $300 million — will be paid privately by himself and 37 corporate and individual donors. Among them is Amazon, the global retail behemoth long cited by Democrats as a symbol of corporate consolidation.
Amazon founder Jeff Bezos also owns The Washington Post, which published an editorial praised for its approval of Trump’s “aggressive approach” to completing the ballroom before the blueprints face “death by a thousand papercuts,” a phrase invoked to describe bureaucratic delays under more conventional review processes.
That combination — a public space financed by major corporations and defended by a prominent newspaper often at odds with the Trump administration — has presented an awkward scenario for Democrats, at a time when they are seeking to define a cohesive message ahead of the next national election cycle.
Some Republicans have dismissed Mr. Swalwell’s push as grandstanding. Jonathan Turley, an attorney who has served as a legal voice for Trump supporters, called the lawmaker’s demand “reckless.” Jason Miller, a close adviser to Mr. Trump, was more direct, labeling Mr. Swalwell an “idiot.”
Architectural plans indicate the colossal structure will “dwarf” the White House itself, already prompting questions about the visual dominance of the new venue. Mr. Trump once claimed that the ballroom “wouldn’t interfere with the existing building,” though critics argue the scale tells a different story.
Mr. Trump has already demonstrated a willingness to reshape the grounds surrounding the executive residence. Over the summer, he paved over the White House Rose Garden to construct a patio — an earlier example of his belief that White House traditions should yield to a more expansive vision of presidential grandeur.
As Democrats search for a unifying theme in anticipation of 2028, Mr. Swalwell appears convinced that the ballroom — and what it represents — may be their newest rallying point. Whether voters will embrace a radical campaign promise to tear down a structure designed to project national prestige remains a question for the years ahead.
[READ MORE: Trump Sanctions Colombia’s President as Drug Crackdown Escalates]
