A major Senate procedural ruling has thrown cold water on Republican efforts to send $1 billion in taxpayer money toward President Donald Trump’s White House ballroom project. The Senate parliamentarian struck the funding down but Republicans say the battle is far from finished.
Background: What Is the White House Ballroom?
The White House ballroom has been one of the most controversial construction projects of Trump’s second term. Trump originally announced plans to build a grand ballroom on the site of the historic East Wing, promising it would cost “no charge to the taxpayer whatsoever” and would be entirely funded by private donors.
Demolition crews tore down the East Wing in October 2025, which itself became a spectacle drawing crowds of onlookers outside the White House fence. The original estimate for the project was $200 million. By December 2025, that figure had doubled to $400 million.
The new ballroom is planned to be 22,000 square feet. It will include offices for the First Lady, a movie theater, a colonnade connecting to the main White House building, and crucially a massive underground security complex beneath it.
The $1 Billion Security Funding: What Republicans Tried to Do
On May 4, 2026, Senate Republicans unveiled a proposal to include $1 billion in funding for the East Wing project inside a larger $72 billion immigration enforcement bill. The money was described as being for “security adjustments and upgrades” to the structure not the ballroom itself.
The White House broke down how the money would be spent. Around $220 million would go toward hardening the East Wing, including bulletproof glass, drone detection systems, and chemical threat filtration. Other funds would cover an underground bomb shelter, a state-of-the-art hospital, military-grade venting, missile-resistant steel columns, and blast-proof glass.
Republicans argued these were genuine national security upgrades. The April shooting incident at a gala attended by Trump was cited as evidence that the East Wing needed better protection.
Parliamentarian Rules It Out of Order
Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough, who has served as the chamber’s procedural referee since 2012, ruled the $1 billion provision out of order on Saturday, May 17.
Her determination was that the security funding for the East Wing renovation falls outside the jurisdiction of the Senate Judiciary Committee. She also found it violates the Byrd rule a procedure specifically designed to keep non-budgetary items out of reconciliation bills.
Republicans had been using the budget reconciliation process precisely because it allows them to pass legislation without needing Democratic votes. The parliamentarian’s ruling effectively blocked that strategy at least temporarily.
GOP Divided: Ballroom Becomes a Political Headache
Even before the parliamentarian ruled, there were serious cracks within the Republican Party over the ballroom funding. Several GOP senators publicly voiced discomfort with the plan.
Senator Rick Scott of Florida said he supports building the ballroom but believes it should be paid for with private donations, as Trump originally promised. “If the White House and Secret Service believe that they need money for construction beyond these private funds they’ve raised, I’m willing to hear them out,” Scott said, adding that wasteful government spending could be cut to cover any gaps.
Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, who chairs the Senate Homeland Security Committee, rejected Senator Lindsey Graham’s separate proposal to provide $400 million directly for construction, calling it a “bad bill.” Paul instead proposed legislation to fast-track approval for the project without adding any new public funding.
Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina warned bluntly that the ballroom funding represented political exposure for Republicans running in the next election cycle. “It represents an exposure, no doubt about it,” Tillis said.
GOP strategist Brian Darling put it plainly: “If you’re spending all this money to fortify the White House, nobody bats an eye. If it’s $1 billion for the ballroom, that creates huge problems.”
Democrats: ‘Trump Broke His Promise to Taxpayers’
Democrats were quick to pounce on the parliamentarian’s ruling as a win. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called it a significant victory and accused Republicans of trying to make taxpayers fund what he described as an unnecessary luxury renovation.
Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon, the top Democrat on the relevant committee, predicted Republicans would try to rewrite the bill to get around the ruling and vowed Democrats would be ready to challenge any revised version.
Democrats have repeatedly pointed out that Trump publicly promised “zero taxpayer dollars” would be used for the ballroom. The White House has not directly addressed that contradiction.
Who Is Paying for the Ballroom? A Web of Donors
Trump has maintained that private donors are covering the ballroom costs. In October 2025, the White House released a list of around three dozen corporate and individual donors including Meta, Apple, Google, Amazon, Blackstone CEO Stephen Schwarzman, and cryptocurrency billionaires Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss.
However, several donor names were withheld, including BlackRock, Nvidia, and Jeff Yass all of whose business interests could be directly affected by Trump administration decisions. Critics raised serious conflict-of-interest concerns.
A fundraising contract obtained through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by the nonprofit Public Citizen revealed that the organization managing donations would receive a 2.5% fee on all funds collected dropping to 2% for amounts above $200 million. With the project at $400 million, that could mean roughly $9 million in fees.
The Cost That Keeps Climbing
The shifting price tag on the ballroom has been a constant source of controversy. Trump himself posted on Truth Social attempting to explain the increases, writing: “The original price was 200 Million Dollars, the double sized, highest quality completed project will be something less than 400 Million Dollars.”
When compared to Trump’s own criticism of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell whom Trump accused of wrongdoing because Fed renovation costs grew by around 30% the White House ballroom costs have risen by a far greater percentage, raising uncomfortable questions about consistency.
Public opinion has not been kind to the project. A Washington Post–ABC News–Ipsos poll found 56% of Americans oppose the ballroom project, while only 28% support it. A YouGov survey similarly found 53% disapprove of the East Wing demolition.
What Happens Next?
Republicans say they plan to rewrite the bill to satisfy the parliamentarian’s concerns and try again. Democrats say they will challenge any revised attempt.
At the same time, the ballroom project faces ongoing legal hurdles. A federal judge previously ruled that the non-security elements of the construction cannot proceed without formal congressional authorization. Getting the $1 billion funding passed into law would also help the Trump administration argue in court that Congress has approved the full project.
The National Capital Planning Commission voted to approve the project on April 2, 2026, but public and legal opposition continues to mount.
Trump has revealed that the ballroom is expected to open before the end of his term. The administration has described it as the “greatest improvement of the White House in the history of the building.” Critics call it a lavish project that contradicts Trump’s promises of fiscal responsibility.
FAQs
Is marriage between cousins legal in Korea?
In South Korea, marriage between cousins including first cousins has been legally permitted since 2005, when the Constitutional Court struck down a centuries-old ban. However, social attitudes vary, and such marriages remain uncommon in practice.
What is the 3 date rule in Korea?
The “3 date rule” is an informal dating norm in South Korea suggesting that couples typically become exclusive or take a relationship to a more serious level by the third date. It reflects broader Korean dating culture, which tends to move quickly toward defined relationship status compared to some Western norms.
Is 20 still a minor in Korea?
Under South Korea’s revised laws, the legal age of adulthood is 19 years old (by Korean age reckoning, which historically counted age differently). From January 2023, South Korea officially adopted the international age-counting system, so a person becomes a legal adult at 19 in the standard international system. Anyone under 19 is considered a minor.
