American History Hotline

Episode: Can the President Tear Down the White House?

Date: January 28, 2026
Host: Bob Crawford
Guest: Robert Clara, author of The Hidden White House: Harry Truman and the Reconstruction of America’s Most Famous Residence

Main Theme

This episode tackles a dramatic and unprecedented question: Does the President of the United States truly have the authority to demolish and radically alter the White House, specifically focusing on President Trump’s recent demolition of the East Wing to make way for a new ballroom.
Historian Robert Clara joins host Bob Crawford to discuss the legal, historical, and cultural implications of White House alterations, the history of major past renovations, and the traditions meant to safeguard this symbolic American residence.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Current East Wing Demolition and the Presidential Power to Alter the White House

• Overview of Recent Events

  • President Trump recently demolished the East Wing, starting October 20th of last year.
  • Plans are underway to build a 90,000 sq. ft. ballroom—almost doubling the White House’s size—purportedly to host formal events.
  • There is ongoing litigation (filed by the National Trust for Historic Preservation), but legal obstacles seem limited.
  • “There isn’t actually very much that protects the White House, which I think comes as a surprise to people.” – Robert Clara [04:07]

• Legal Loopholes and Oversight

  • The White House is exempt from the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as are the Capitol and the Supreme Court.
  • The National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) has some oversight over construction, but crucially:
    “Here’s the loophole... There is no oversight over demolition. So he was able to bring a bulldozer... to the east wing and knock it down pretty much at a whim.” – Robert Clara [00:00 & 04:56]
  • The plans for reconstruction face nominal review, but the NCPC is largely loyal to the current president.

2. Historic Precedents: How Past Presidents Changed the White House

• Typical Presidential Modifications

  • Most changes by new presidents involve paint, wallpaper, light fixtures, and minor redecorations.
  • Major structural changes have been rare since Truman’s reconstruction.
  • “Presidents, like, largely took a free hand with the house.” – Robert Clara [09:42]

• Large-Scale Historic Additions

  • James Monroe added the South Portico (1824); Andrew Jackson added the North Portico (1829).
  • These were seen as architecturally harmonious and did not provoke significant controversy.

• Evolution of the White House Layout

  • The original 1800s White House was both a residence and an administrative building.
  • The West Wing was added in 1902 (Teddy Roosevelt era) due to space constraints.

3. Truman’s Gutting and Reconstruction (1948–1952)

• Why Gut the White House?

  • Years of modernization (plumbing, electricity, elevators) had compromised structural integrity; the house was literally sinking in the middle.
  • Notable incidents:
    • Chandelier swaying during a reception due to Truman’s upstairs bath.
    • Daughter Margaret Truman’s piano leg punched through the floor.
    • Chandelier swinging over guests during a recital, nearly causing mass panic.
      “The house was also losing its ability to bear weight because its actual structural integrity was being compromised.” – Robert Clara [18:15]

• How Was It Reconstructed?

  • The strategy was to save the stone exteriors (“the shell”) but gut and replace everything inside.
  • All interior materials—carved wood, paneling, plaster, flooring—were to be restored, but underfunding led to replacement with new (1950s) materials.
  • Some “original” interiors today are from 1950; others were sold as souvenirs, repurposed, or simply dumped.

• Public Perception

  • The gutting drew little protest due to postwar attitudes and lack of historic preservation ethos.
  • “If you step inside the White House... everything that you’re seeing... dates to about 1950 and afterward.” – Robert Clara [21:52]

4. Comparing Past and Present: Context for Trump’s Demolition

• Key Distinctions

  • Truman’s drastic work was structurally necessary; the house was “in danger of collapse.”
  • The East Wing “never had that problem. It was not in danger of collapse.” – Robert Clara [35:54]
  • White House officials under Trump called the East Wing “historically insignificant,” which Clara disputes, noting its roots go back to 1902.

• Intent and Proportion

  • Trump’s proposed ballroom is “so outsized... it overtakes [the house] in some ways,” unlike past harmonious changes. [09:59]
  • The change is broadly seen as serving the current president’s personal interests, lacking precedent for traditional consultation or proportionality.

5. Funding Renovations: Who Pays?

• Truman’s Era

  • Congress funded the Truman reconstruction, albeit grudgingly and with minimal budget.
  • Truman found “extra money” in existing appropriations for less controversial projects.

• Trump’s Private Donor Strategy

  • Trump avoids Congressional funding, raising $300–400 million from private donors for the ballroom.
  • “There’s nothing—well, it remains to be seen if this holds water legally—but Trump at least understands that going to Congress... is a non-starter.” – Robert Clara [38:17]
  • Both Truman and Trump found ways to pay without direct Congressional approval, but with very different levels of public and political scrutiny.

6. Tradition, Precedent, and Preservation

• Cultural Expectations

  • Tradition has been to make only measured changes, out of respect for future presidents and the symbolic nature of the house.
  • “The weight of tradition... has restrained [presidents], at least to some degree, from making super dramatic changes to the house.” – Robert Clara [31:36]

• Contemporary Polarization

  • Trump’s disregard for consultation and the ballroom’s scale is seen by some as breaking these norms—and as a personal monument more than a public improvement.
  • “It feels a little like a bait and switch... I think that he is building a monument to his own presidency.” – Robert Clara [42:06]
  • The proposal is divisive, with critics objecting to process and aesthetics, while noting practical complaints (e.g., cramped events in the East Room).

7. What If the Next President Wants to Undo It?

• Is Reversal Possible?

  • Technically, yes—the president has broad latitude over the White House, and future changes are possible.
  • However, precedent and the wishes of influential historical/preservation committees could guide or restrain future action.

• Traditional Consultations

  • Groups like the White House Historical Association (started by Jackie Kennedy) lack legal power but play important advisory roles.
  • “It is the courtly, traditional thing to do to consult the people in these groups...” – Robert Clara [45:20]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Legal Oversight:
  “There is no oversight over demolition. So he was able to... knock it down pretty much at a whim.” – Robert Clara [00:00/04:56]

• On the Ballroom’s Scale:
  “The ballroom is so outsized in comparison... it basically overshadows the house. It overtakes it in some ways.” – Robert Clara [09:59]

• On Historical Preservation:
  “Preservation in air quotes meant saving the facade... But everything on the inside was going to be gutted and removed.” – Robert Clara [22:41]

• On the Significance of the East Wing:
  “The East Wing... was not in danger of collapse.” – Robert Clara [35:54]

• On Funding Tactics:
  “Truman... broke the piggy bank and moved some numbers around... and you could argue that President Trump has done something analogous.” – Robert Clara [38:28]

• On Trump’s Motives:
  “I think that he is building a monument to his own presidency.” – Robert Clara [42:06]

• On the Possibility of Reversing the Change:
  “Sure... the president has that power. But tradition and the advisory committees matter.” – Robert Clara [45:09]

• On the General Dilemma:
  “What is preservation, what is worth preserving, what is history? These are still very slippery questions.” – Robert Clara [29:11]

Timestamps for Significant Segments

• [00:00–02:40] – Trump’s East Wing demolition: timeline, scale, legality
• [04:00–05:22] – Loopholes in federal preservation law; limits of NCPC
• [08:08–10:47] – How presidents have traditionally altered the White House
• [13:15–17:26] – Crisis in the Truman years: structural failure, anecdotes
• [22:41–24:22] – How the White House was gutted and rebuilt (Truman era)
• [35:22–37:59] – Comparing Truman and Trump’s approaches: necessary vs. optional changes
• [38:08–40:02] – Renovation funding: private donors vs. Congress
• [40:46–44:46] – Motives, aesthetics, and the personal vs. institutional impact of renovations
• [45:09–47:31] – Could a future president undo Trump’s ballroom? Tradition vs. power

Conclusion

This episode offers a lively, deeply informed examination of how much authority presidents have over America’s most iconic residence.
While tradition, historic precedent, and committees provide guidance, the law leaves much to presidential discretion—opening the White House’s physical and symbolic legacy to the character and ambitions of its temporary inhabitants.
The debate about the East Wing demolition, through the lens of history, becomes a broader reflection on the intersection of power, preservation, and political symbolism.

Further Reading

For more on White House renovations and history, check out Robert Clara’s book:
The Hidden White House: Harry Truman and the Reconstruction of America’s Most Famous Residence.