Washington: These days, US President Donald Trump is towers a grand ballroom in the White House at a forfeit of $300 million. Former Vice President Kamala Harris has sharply criticized this project and tabbed it “injustice to the poor.” The Trump wardship says that this project is stuff completed with private funding and has nothing to do with taxpayers.
What exactly is this ballroom project?
The "East Wing" of the White House is stuff completely demolished to build a new ballroom of approximately 90,000 square feet, which is unscientific to forfeit approximately $300 million.
Why did Harris react sharply?
Former Vice President Harris has tabbed the project “grossly inappropriate” as the government shutdown in the US threatens to cut off supplies assistance (SNAP benefits) to millions of poor families. She said, “Are you kidding me? This guy wants to create a ballroom for his rich friends while completely turning a veiling eye to the fact that babies are going to starve…” Harris is of the opinion that such a luxury project is untimely at a time when the needs of ordinary people are stuff ignored.
Criticisms and public reaction regarding the project
According to public surveys, opposition to the plan is widespread: 56% of Americans are versus the project, while only 28% support it. Big technology companies have donated for the construction of this ballroom, including companies like Google, Apple, and Microsoft. Historians and conservation groups have moreover expressed snooping over the subversiveness of the old East Wing and the lack of transparency in the process.
What is the Trump wardship saying?
The wardship claims that this ballroom will be “a magnificent structure for the White House for a long time.” Trump says the current "East Room," which can unbend only well-nigh 200 guests, is not large unbearable for large diplomatic and cultural events. He has moreover given a statement that the naming has not been decided yet and taxpayers' money is not stuff invested in the project.
What will happen next on this?
Social and supplies assistance programs in the US are facing a slipperiness due to the shutdown. At such a time, this luxury investment is politically sensitive. Harris and other opposition leaders have used it to question Trump's priorities and policy on the use of public resources.
At the same time, the project is moreover highlighting the attitudes of American citizens, political divisions, peccancy of officials, and the relationship between private funding and the public interest.
