• Chamberlain Harris, 26, holds a political science degree and no documented arts expertise but will sit on the 126-year-old Commission of Fine Arts
• Harris will be sworn in Thursday — the same day the commission is scheduled to review and potentially advance Trump's White House ballroom plans
• Former commissioners from both Republican and Democratic administrations have raised concerns about the panel's current composition

WASHINGTON, DC (TDR) — President Donald Trump has placed his 26-year-old former receptionist on the Commission of Fine Arts, a 126-year-old panel originally established to be staffed by "well-qualified judges of the fine arts" — and she is set to be sworn in the same day the commission could vote to advance his controversial $400 million ballroom project.

Chamberlain Harris, who currently serves as deputy director of Oval Office operations, earned the nickname "receptionist of the United States" during Trump's first term. She holds a bachelor's degree in political science from the University at Albany, SUNY, with minors in communications and economics. She has no documented expertise in architecture, urban planning or the fine arts.

White House Communications Director Steven Cheung defended the appointment in a statement.

"She understands the President's vision and appreciation of the arts like very few others, and brings a unique perspective that will serve the Commission well. She will be a tremendous asset to the Commission of Fine Arts and continue to honorably serve our country well."

How the Commission Is Supposed to Work

When Congress created the Commission of Fine Arts in 1910, it envisioned a body of independent experts who would advise the federal government on architecture, design and artistic development across the nation's capital. The commission's original members included Daniel Burnham and Frederick Law Olmsted Jr. — architects and urban planners who literally designed much of Washington.

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10

The panel reviews everything from major construction projects to national memorials, coins and medals. Its recommendations carry significant weight in determining whether federal projects proceed.

Alex Krieger, an architect and professor at the Harvard Graduate School of Design who served on the commission under both Obama and Trump's first term, was blunt about the current state of affairs.

"It's disastrous."

Former commissioners said they could not recall a panel member in the commission's entire history with as little prior arts experience as Harris.

Both Sides Have Reshaped the Panel

Not all of the criticism runs in one direction. Witold Rybczynski, an architect chosen for the commission by President George W. Bush who served a second term under Obama, noted that this kind of reshaping is not entirely unprecedented.

"The degree of expertise has varied."

Rybczynski also pointed out that President Joe Biden reshaped the panel by firing Trump appointees before their terms concluded. Past presidents from both parties have installed political appointees alongside lesser-known experts.

The difference in scale, however, is striking. Trump fired all six sitting commissioners in October 2025 — while East Wing demolition was already underway — leaving the panel completely empty for months. He then restocked it during a 19-day appointment spree in January ahead of the commission's first meeting to discuss the ballroom. Harris is one of seven commissioners appointed during this period.

Other new members include Mary Anne Carter, chair of the National Endowment for the Arts and close friend of White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles; art critic and conservative commentator Roger Kimball; and architect James McCrery, who was previously hired to lead the ballroom construction itself.

The Ballroom Backstory

The timing of Harris's appointment is inseparable from the project she will help review. The White House demolished the entire East Wing beginning in October 2025 to make way for a 90,000-square-foot ballroom — nearly twice the size of the White House itself before the demolition. The project's estimated cost has ballooned from $200 million to $400 million since its initial announcement.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE THE DUPREE REPORT

In December, a federal judge instructed the White House to submit its plans to both the Commission of Fine Arts and the National Capital Planning Commission — a ruling that came after the National Trust for Historic Preservation sued to halt the project.

"No president is legally allowed to tear down portions of the White House without any review whatsoever — not President Trump, not President Biden, and not anyone else."

The administration has maintained that Trump has statutory authority over White House modifications and that the project is funded entirely by private donors. Public polling has consistently shown the project is unpopular — a YouGov survey found 53% of Americans disapproved of the East Wing demolition, and a Washington Post-ABC News-Ipsos poll found 56% opposed the overall project.

Architects reviewing the newly released renderings have also raised design concerns, with one Biden-era commissioner describing the addition as "a poorly proportioned pseudo-neoclassical structure that is completely out of scale with the White House."

The White House hopes to win formal approval from both review panels by March and begin above-ground construction as early as April.

When a 126-year-old oversight commission created to provide independent expert review is restocked with appointees loyal to the very project they are reviewing, does the review process still serve its intended purpose — and should that concern apply equally regardless of which president does the restocking?

Sources

This report was compiled using information from The Washington Post's reporting on the Harris appointment, The New Republic's profile of Harris, CNN's reporting on the commission appointments, CBS News' coverage of the National Trust lawsuit, PBS NewsHour's reporting on the legal challenge, the National Trust for Historic Preservation's lawsuit filing, The Architect's Newspaper's analysis of the project, Newsweek's coverage of the legal proceedings, National Today's review of the ballroom renderings, and NOTUS' reporting on public opposition.

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10