By John A. Tures, Professor of Political Science, LaGrange College

This may come as a shock to you, but I don’t oppose President Donald Trump’s changes being made to the White House, per se. So many U.S. Presidents have put their own alterations to the White House grounds, so why shouldn’t Trump be able to change things somewhat? But it’s broken promises, the dangerous means of doing it that could affect people, and the blatant disinformation about a prior president’s alterations that should have most Americans concerned.

Believe it or not, I’m not surprised the East Wing of the White House was gutted. Candidate Donald Trump said as much at a speech I attended in Atlanta during his first presidential campaign. Toward the end of a very long speech (I think the longest I have ever attended), he told the remaining audience about why he decided to run for president, why he didn’t like the large outdoor tent for a state visit, and how he’d build some kind of big beautiful ballroom for the White House, but Obama’s aides didn’t take him up on the idea.

When I told that to story to others, listeners looked at me in shock. Not anymore.

When my wife and I toured the White House in the Summer of 2001, it was a special day where you got to go out on the grounds, and not just the inside. You could see how so many presidents have left their stamp on the whole area around the White House. Trump’s is just a little bigger.

But here’s the problem. First of all, he broke a promise not to destroy the East Wing. He had reasons. Based upon his grandiose plans, it was inevitable that such changes would be needed. He could have argued that he was modernizing underground defenses. He could have taken his case to the American people. Sure there would have been partisan polarization, but I believe that a majority of people would have accepted the plan, grudgingly or otherwise.

But that didn’t happen.

Instead, he bypassed the National Capital Planning Commission and fired all members of the Commission of Fine Arts, both of which were supposed to review the proposed plans, according to the Daily Beast, as posted in Yahoo. He also forbade pictures of the destruction, which doesn’t sound like someone implementing a popular plan. It looks bad to build a facility that seems destined only for the super-rich, at a time when SNAP benefits are running out. There are concerns about the ballooning costs. Though it’s claimed that the whole thing is paid for with private money, there’s a question of what those private companies will get in return for funds.

Now we’ve learned that by not going through proper channels and reviews, asbestos may be kicked up into the surrounding area, which could affect not just the health of the construction workers, but everyone else within the White House. Everyone. “Federal law requires comprehensive asbestos inspection, notification, and abatement before any demolition,” the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization wrote in a press release last week. “No publicly available information demonstrates that these statutory obligations have been fulfilled,”” according to The New Republic.

To offset the growing backlash, online groups are falsely claiming that President Barack Obama engaged in a similarly expensive tear-down to build a basketball court, with the ironic ending “Democrats your hypocrisy is astounding” according to Snopes, which also debunked this myth.

“Does a photo show demolition done to the White House by Barack Obama to install an indoor basketball court? No, that’s not true: A black and white photo shows the West Wing expansion project conducted by President Franklin Roosevelt in 1934. Obama did install a basketball court in 2009, 75 years after the photo was taken, but it did not require demolition of White House buildings. He added basketball hoops and court markings to an existing outdoor tennis court on the South Lawn of the White House; preserving the potential for the court to be used for either sport.” according to Yahoo’s Fact-Check. And funds for renovations at the White House were approved in 2008 when requested by Bush; Obama was inaugurated in 2009.

What could have been a moment of unity in improving White House defenses and a modest-sized facility for state functions has now devolved into misinformation and serious concerns. One hopes that future plans and policies involving this country go through proper procedures that were put in place for safety reasons and checks to ensure one person doesn’t control everything.

John A. Tures is a professor of political science at LaGrange College in LaGrange, Georgia. His views are his own. He can be reached at jtures@lagrange.edu or on “X” at @johntures2. His first book “Branded” will be coming out this Fall, published by Huntsville Independent Press (https://www.huntsvilleindependent.com/).