Making the ballroom great again — or at least pretty good
Could we turn a White House monstrosity into something that represents our better nature instead of our worst instincts?
The following suggestion is based on two premises, both of which are admittedly questionable:
● There will be a free and fair presidential election in 2028.
● A Democrat will win.
That may be a stretch, but let’s assume, for now, that this will happen. The new president will inherit some kind of monstrosity where the East Wing used to be: either a partially or fully completed ballroom.
So, what should be done with it?
My first thought was: Tear it down and rebuild the East Wing exactly as it was. But, among other things, that would be expensive and would merely restore things to the way they were. Instead, perhaps there’s a way to, as Joe Biden might say, “build back better.”
I got the idea during the commemorations of the 25th anniversary of 9/11. I recalled one of my favorite stories written at the time, by a reporter I’ve always admired, Nina Bernstein, then at The New York Times. Published on Sept. 26, 2001, under the headline “On Pier 94, a Welfare State That Works, and a Possible Model for the Future” it’s all about how America provides help to those we deem worthy. Here’s how the story begins:
Inside the Family Assistance Center on Pier 94, where bereaved relatives and surviving workers of the World Trade Center disaster are being urged to seek help of all kinds, it is as though the welfare state stumbled into paradise.
The blue carpeting is thick enough to soothe the weariest step. No matter what language is spoken, there are interpreters to translate and explain. The banks of telephones are free, like the child care, the all-day buffet, and the kindness of strangers.
Get Richard Wexler’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
Even more important to many of those gathering here under row upon row of star-spangled banners is the presence of every relevant federal, state and city agency. They are not only neatly labeled and well staffed, but eager to cut through rules and red tape to speed financial help to those in need. …
Of course, the “model for the future” part never happened. But now we have the perfect chance to try for it:
How about turning the 90,000-square-foot ballroom into a permanent version of Pier 94? It would take a bit of subdividing, of course (creating a competition for architecture students would be a nice touch), but surely it could be turned into the ultimate multi-service center for the impoverished of DC. Surely there would be enough room for at least some of these:
● A homeless shelter
● A food bank
● A soup kitchen
● A health clinic
● A childcare center
● A legal assistance center for immigrants
● An employment center
● Every relevant federal and DC agency, neatly labeled, well-staffed and eager to cut through rules and red tape to speed financial help to those in need.
I was tempted to suggest that this would mean replacing our worst instincts with our best, but that would be an overstatement. Our best instincts are those that might drive us toward someday creating a society in which none of these things is necessary except the employment and childcare centers.
So this idea wouldn’t really make the ballroom great again. But it might make it good.
