Senate Republicans are revising a proposal to direct $1 billion toward White House security and related improvements after the body’s parliamentarian determined the language did not comply with budget reconciliation rules, creating another uncertainty point for a project already navigating legal challenges and procurement scrutiny.<\/p>\n
The ruling affects a package Republicans had argued would support broader security and protective infrastructure needs surrounding President Donald Trump’s planned White House and East Wing modernization effort, not solely his ballroom construction.<\/p>\n
Still, GOP leaders signaled the effort is continuing.<\/p>\n
\u201cRedraft. Refine. Resubmit. None of this is abnormal during a Byrd bath process,\u201d Ryan Wrasse, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader John Thune, wrote on X\u00a0<\/a>after the ruling.<\/p>\n The ruling stemmed from the Senate’s “Byrd rule,” named for the late Sen. Richard Byrd (D-W.Va.), which limits what can be included in budget reconciliation bills by barring provisions considered primarily policy-focused rather than directly budgetary. During an internal review process known as a “Byrd bath,” the Senate parliamentarian evaluates whether provisions meet those standards, forcing lawmakers to rewrite or remove language that falls outside the rules.<\/p>\n Trump has said the approximately $400-million ballroom itself would be privately funded, while separate discussions in Congress focused on security and supporting infrastructure. Republicans have argued the broader request would include visitor screening, agent training and other protective measures extending beyond the ballroom itself.<\/p>\n Questions remain regarding where project boundaries begin and end between privately funded ballroom construction and federally supported protective infrastructure, particularly if security assumptions become intertwined with project delivery or supporting infrastructure.<\/p>\n \n ]]><\/p>\n Looking for quick answers on construction and engineering topics? <\/p>\n Ask ENR \u2192 Legal uncertainty surrounding the project also remains unresolved. Earlier this spring, a federal appeals panel allowed ballroom construction to continue while administratively staying U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon\u2019s injunction and scheduling expedited review for June<\/a> as litigation brought by the National Trust for Historic Preservation continues.<\/p>\n Judges previously wrote that the record raised \u201cunresolved factual questions\u201d about whether above-grade ballroom work and below-grade security systems could be separated\u2014an issue with potential implications for project sequencing and delivery assumptions.<\/p>\n
Try Ask ENR, our new smart AI search tool.<\/p>\n
\n <\/a>\n<\/p>\n