Ballroom Accountability Package v1.0

$300 million.

After starting at $200 million, Donald has let feature creep bring the total of his ballroom fetish to the more widely agreed upon number of $300 million - and that's without incorporating any of the stupid demands you know he'll have, either in construction or decoration. And his claim is that it will be 'totally paid for' (by these people). Which should worry people in terms of private funding of pet projects/lobbying, anonymity, disclosure of who's involved... And because it's a public building. If this is necessary, not only should we pay for it, we should insist that the guy doing it be able to and required to publicly justify spending public money - not say "don't worry about it because you won't have to pay for it".
At least tax money won't go towards it.
...Right?

Humans are very bad at numbers once they get past a certain level. That's not an insult - it's a truth. Once you get into the millions/billions/trillions level, humanity is not very good at detecting the differences in a vacuum; we need something relative to compare it to, preferably something we think of as important/necessary. (The economy doesn't help. that's why 'the prices of eggs/gas' are so focused on: something that cost $5 when gas averaged $1/gallon should be around $15 now, right? It gives us something to hang on to.)
So...

$100 million - $277 million.
$7 million - $17.5 million yearly.

This is an approximation of what it will cost taxpayers to deal with just the first-order consequences/maintenance of this urge to splurge. I've got it broken down here for quibbling over the values - but the point is that it is not paid for. Not in space, time, efficiency, or practicality.

Thus, this. I'm no legislator - but I'm pissed. So I built a beginning point if anyone wants it - a place to start regarding all of the issues that could arise. Including that this is literally building a club next to the bedroom of the president. There was no ballroom because this is supposed to be a living space - not temporary housing for a millionaire who uses tax-supplied transport to go to their 'actual' home weekly or even daily. It's a [censored] security risk. So part of the bill is intended to fix this crap once Donald gets crowbarred out of this space he's treating like his own permanent second home to decorate; it requires double financing to allow the necessary offices to be restored once he's gone.
I'm working to put up a version of the argument with myself that this was based on for reference - but this is a place to start.

Referenced files (in case you missed it in the opening)


Table of Contents


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This package consolidates the full legislative project addressing privately funded structural alterations to the Executive Residence. It integrates donor-risk analysis, cost modeling, legal-gap identification, and the completed bill text ("Ballroom Accountability Act"). The Act establishes mandatory donor transparency, restoration-bond requirements, oversight protections, and long‑term structural safeguards.


KEY FINDINGS (CONDENSED)


BILL TEXT (SUMMARY)

TITLE I — DEFINITIONS & SCOPE

TITLE II — DONOR DISCLOSURE & TRANSPARENCY REQUIREMENTS

TITLE III — LIMITS ON PRIVATE FINANCING OF EXECUTIVE-RESIDENCE ALTERATIONS

TITLE IV — RESTORATION BOND REQUIREMENT ("YOU BREAK IT, YOU FIX IT")

TITLE V — PRESERVATION, SECURITY, AND ARCHITECTURAL OVERSIGHT

TITLE VI — PROCUREMENT & BUDGET INTEGRATION

TITLE VII — POST-CONSTRUCTION AUDITS & OVERSIGHT

TITLE VIII — LOBBYING, CONTRACTING, & FEDERAL-BENEFIT RESTRICTIONS FOR DONORS

TITLE IX — ENFORCEMENT, PENALTIES, & CIVIL REMEDIES

TITLE X — IMPLEMENTATION, TIMELINES, & TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS


FULL STATUTORY DRAFT

A BILL

To establish mandatory donor transparency, restoration-bond requirements, security review standards, and restrictions on private financing of structural alterations to the Executive Residence.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

TITLE I — DEFINITIONS

TITLE II — DONOR DISCLOSURE

TITLE III — LIMITS ON PRIVATE FINANCING

TITLE IV — RESTORATION BOND REQUIREMENT

TITLE V — PRESERVATION & SECURITY REVIEW

TITLE VI — PROCUREMENT & BUDGET INTEGRATION

TITLE VII — POST-CONSTRUCTION AUDITS

TITLE VIII — DONOR RESTRICTIONS

TITLE IX — ENFORCEMENT

TITLE X — IMPLEMENTATION


COMMENTARY, NOTES, AND LEGISLATIVE INTENT

General Legislative Intent

The purpose of this Act is to prevent privately financed structural modifications to secure federal facilities from bypassing transparency, oversight, and long-term accountability requirements. The East Wing ballroom controversy revealed multiple systemic weaknesses in donor disclosure, security review, procurement integration, and restoration liability. This legislation corrects those systemic failures by imposing mandatory disclosure, oversight, and financial responsibility requirements.

The Act is explicitly designed to protect future administrations—regardless of political affiliation—from inheriting financial, operational, or security burdens created for the personal preferences of any president.

TITLE-BY-TITLE COMMENTARY

Title I — Definitions

Establishes legally precise terms. The definitions lock down the scope: they prevent evasions such as labeling major structural demolition as “restoration” or disguising donor control through shell entities. The goal is to prevent reinterpretive loopholes.

Title II — Donor Disclosure & Transparency

This title addresses the lack of mandatory disclosure and shell-entity opacity that characterized the ballroom donations. It establishes a transparent record of all donors, amounts, and beneficial owners.

Title III — Limits on Private Structural Financing

This closes the loophole allowing private financing to substitute for congressional appropriations to perform structural modifications. It distinguishes permissible preservation work from prohibited structural alteration.

Title IV — Restoration Bond Requirement

Creates the financial accountability core of the Act. Any structural modification must be backed by a bond ensuring that restoration, security, and operational disruptions can be remedied without burdening future administrations.

Title V — Preservation & Security Review

Codifies preservation and security oversight. Mandates formal review and gives the Secret Service conditional veto authority for unsafe designs.

Title VI — Procurement & Budget Integration

Ensures private-funded projects cannot bypass federal procurement, safety certification, or budget-impact transparency.

Title VII — Post-Construction Audits

Requires GAO audits to assess long-term costs, structural integrity, security implications, and workspace impacts.

Title VIII — Donor Restrictions

Introduces temporary limits on lobbying and contracting to reduce incentives for influence-buying via renovation gifts.

Title IX — Enforcement

Provides meaningful civil and criminal penalties and allows government authorities to halt unsafe or non-compliant construction.

Title X — Implementation

Provides effective dates, retroactive disclosure, and transition rules that apply to ongoing or recently completed projects without imposing retroactive punishment.


CROSS-REFERENCE MATRIX

ProblemStatutory Solution
Donor opacityTitle II
Shell-entity influenceTitle II + penalties
Workspace lossTitle IV
Security riskTitle V + VII
Lack of preservation oversightTitle V
Procurement bypassTitle VI
No cost-recoveryTitle IV
Lobbying influenceTitle VIII
No audit requirementsTitle VII
No emergency halt authorityTitle IX