Search This Blog

Saturday, August 16, 2025

Mamdani’s financial disclosure filings filled with discrepancies

 Socialist NYC mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani has scored nearly $10 million in public matching funds for his campaign, despite having serious discrepancies in his mandatory financial disclosure filings, The Post has learned.

Mamdani, the frontrunner heading into November’s general election, claimed in a recent filing to the city’s Conflicts of Interest Board reporting his finances for last year that he has owned vacant land in Jinja, Uganda, valued at $100,000 to $250,000 since March 14, 2016, records show.

Mamdani, who earns $142,000 annually as a Queens-based state assemblyman, also noted owning interest in two stocks valued at a combined $5,000 to $55,000 – MiTec and PBC – and having a retirement plan worth another $1,000 to $5,000.

Mamdani received his matching funds despite the apparent discrepancy in his financial disclosure forms.Janet Mayer/INSTARimages.com

However, in annual financial disclosure statements for 2020 through 2024 filed with the state Legislative Ethics Commission, Mamdani, 33, said he took full ownership of the Uganda site four years earlier – in 2012.

He also didn’t list any stocks, instead claiming the only the securities he owned were valued at less than $2,000 from a retirement plan with the social-justice organization Chhaya where he worked in 2019.

The revelation that Mamdani’s state filings contradict his city filings come while two of his top competitors, Mayor Eric Adams and ex-Gov. Andrew Cuomo, have been denied millions of dollars in matching funds by the city’s Campaign Finance Board after being flagged for various violations.

“Every time you scratch the surface with this guy, more red flags emerge,” said defense lawyer Jim Walden, who is running for mayor as an Independent.

“Here, the obvious concern is that he is understating his wealth. He should come clean. If he can’t be honest, add that to the growing list of disqualifiers.”

A rep for the Campaign Finance Board declined to comment.

Lisa Partelow Reid, executive director of the state Legislative Ethics Commission, said elected officials who knowingly make false statements to the commission could face fines of up to $40,000. If amendments are needed “the assumption” typically is “an inadvertent error” occurred, she said.

Mayor Adams was not given matching funds for his reelection campaign.Derek French/SOPA Images/Shutterstock

There are no records of Mamdani amending his filings.

Reid declined to discuss Mamdani repeating the same information on his stocks and land ownership in five straight annual state filings – but then providing different information in his COIB filing.

Heavy security and phone jammers marked a recent three-day celebration at Mamdani’s Ugandan compound.New York Post

COIB Executive Director Carolyn Miller deferred questions about matching funds to the Campaign Finance Board but said “filers regularly and routinely amend their annual disclosure reports to resolve discrepancies.”

Hank Sheinkopf, a longtime Democratic political consultant, questioned whether the state and city entities — which are designed to be independent and apolitical — are ignoring Mamdani’s discrepancies because they’re worried about being accused of Islamophobia.

“It’s hypocritical at best,” he said.

Mamdani did not return messages.

https://nypost.com/2025/08/16/us-news/nyc-mayoral-candidate-zohran-mamdanis-financial-disclosure-filings-filled-with-discrepancies/

https://www.marketscreener.com/news/zelenskiy-braces-for-perilous-trump-talks-in-washington-on-monday-ce7c51dfdb8df322

Electroconvulsive Therapy Patients Often Not Fully Informed of Risks: Study

 

  • An international survey of ECT recipients found that over half felt they weren't given adequate information about the treatment beforehand.
  • Many patients remember being told that ECT was safe and that it was their last treatment option.
  • ECT is recognized by several medical societies as being an effective treatment for severe mental illness.

Patients and family members of those who have undergone electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) reported a mixed bag of information being given beforehand.

According to a survey of 858 ECT recipients, 59% felt they weren't given adequate information about ECT before receiving the treatment for severe mental illness. Another 17% said they weren't sure, reported John Read, PhD, of the University of East London, and colleagues.

Among the 286 family members and friends who were also surveyed, 27.4% and 12.3% said they weren't given enough information or weren't sure if they were, respectively.

"Our international survey, the largest ever conducted, seems to confirm audits of ECT leaflets, in Australia and the U.K., which found that the principle of informed consent is being consistently breached," the group wrote in the Journal of Medical Ethicsopens in a new tab or window.

"The findings are also consistent with findings that most users of antidepressants and antipsychotics are not fully informed about most of their adverse effects," they added.

Developed in the late 1930s, ECT involves delivering brief electrical pulses to the brain while under general anesthesia and a muscle relaxant, typically two or three times a week for a total of six to 12 treatments, depending on illness severity. Electrodes are attached to the patient's scalp to deliver a brief and controlled series of electrical pulses inducing a seizure in the brain. The seizure lasts about 1 minute, and then the patient awakens about 5 to 10 minutes later.

The procedure is typically reserved for patients with more severe psychiatric conditions, like severe depression and bipolar disorder, that haven't responded to other treatments.

ECT is recognized by several medical societies, including the American Psychiatric Association (APA), as being an effective treatment for severe mental illness. However, the APA notes that ECT doesn't prevent a return of illness in the future and that most ECT patients will need to continue with some sort of maintenance treatment, like medication, psychotherapy, or ongoing ECT treatments.

APA emphasizes informed consentopens in a new tab or window as part of the process prior to ECT, in addition to a thorough psychiatric assessment, a medical examination, and sometimes a basic blood test and an electrocardiogram.

While some patients can experience longer-term memory problems, most cases of ECT-associated memory loss are temporary and improve within a couple of months.

When asked about adverse effects, 63.4% of ECT recipients said they were informed the procedure can cause temporary memory problems, and 17.2% said they were told it can cause long-term or permanent memory problems. About 5% said they were told women are more likely to have memory problems.

Many said they were told there are no long-term adverse effects and that it was "extremely safe" and "safer than medication." In recounting discussion with their doctors and nurses, several patients said the word "harmless" was used.

Also, 27.9% said they were informed of risks from repeated general anesthesia, and 11.6% said they were told ECT can cause heart problems.

As for general information about the treatment, most (58.3%) said they were told depression is caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain, and many (42.3%) were told ECT corrects this chemical imbalance or another brain abnormality. One patient recounted being told ECT would "reboot my brain like a computer," while another was told ECT would "reset the brain electrically and allow it to function normally."

Many ECT patients said they were told this treatment was a last resort and that they had no other options left. One person said they were told "it is the last solution," and another said it was "the only choice for treatment-resistant depression."

Most also recounted being told ECT can be life-saving or prevent suicide (68.2%) and that ECT is the most effective treatment for severe depression (63.3%). A few said their doctors or nurses called ECT a "miracle cure."

About 12% said they were told there is no evidence ECT has any long-term benefits. A fifth said they were told about legal rights in relation to ECT.

The survey was disseminated from January to September 2024. Respondents spanned 44 countries, but most were from the U.S. and were white (87%) and female (73%).

Average age at last ECT was 41.9 but ranged from 12 to 87. About three-quarters of ECT recipients had their last ECT between 2010 and 2024; just 1.7% had it between 1950 and 1969.

Depression was the most common reason for ECT (74.3%), followed by psychosis or schizophrenia (17.2%), bipolar disorder (15.3%), catatonia (7.8%), and an unspecified "other" reason (12.8%). Nearly 6% didn't know why they had it.

Read and co-authors pointed out some limitations to the survey, including that all responses were dependent on memory. Since ECT can impact memory, people who reported being "unsure" about if they were told certain information doesn't necessarily mean they weren't provided it, the researchers said.

Disclosures

Excess Health Risks Linger in Childhood Cancer Survivors Into 50s and Beyond

 

  • Childhood cancer survivors over age 50 had a threefold higher mortality risk compared with the general population, primarily from new cancers.
  • Survivors had a twofold higher risk of chronic health conditions, tripling for the risk of multiple conditions, compared with their siblings.
  • Radiation therapy accounted for 40% of the risk of new cancers, but chemotherapy had no significant associations with late effects.

Older adults who survived childhood cancers continue to die earlier, have more new cancers, and have worse health outcomes compared with the general population, a new analysis of an ongoing study showed.

Survivors older than 50 had a threefold greater risk of dying within 5 to 15 years, most often from development of new cancers. Childhood cancer survivors had more than twice the risk of chronic health conditions and were more than three times as likely to have multiple severe, life-threatening, or fatal chronic conditions, as compared with their siblings.

Much of the excess risk was attributable to childhood treatment with radiation therapy, reported Rusha Bhandari, MD, of City of Hope in Duarte, California, and co-authors in the Journal of Clinical Oncologyopens in a new tab or window.

"We've known for some time that we need to be screening these patients differently from what you would screen someone who hasn't had a history of cancer and treatment, things you don't usually expect in young individuals, such as heart disease and diabetes," Bhandari told MedPage Today. "What we didn't know was whether, when they're 30, 40 years or more out from treatment, are they still at a higher risk for these conditions?"

"That's really important for us to know, as we have this growing population of now-older survivors, to understand how best to meet their needs and counsel them regarding their potential risks related to their prior cancer treatment," she added.

The study is one of the first to provide insight into the health status of and risks for older survivors of childhood cancers, said Tara Henderson, MD, MPH, of Lurie Children's Hospital in Chicago.

"This is still a population with significant health risks," said Henderson, past-chair of the American Society of Clinical Oncology Cancer Survivorship Committee. "What's interesting is that radiation-induced cancers are driving the risk. It's really important for the doctors taking care of these patients to understand that they have significant cancer risk and other health risks compared to the general population."

"We know that 85% of childhood cancer survivors get their care in the community with primary care providers; they're not getting their care at the cancer center," Henderson continued. "We've done a lot of work looking at what primary care providers need, and they are willing to take care of these patients. They just want to kind of phone a friend at the cancer center if they need to."

The risks of radiation therapy have been well documented, Henderson acknowledged, and treatment of childhood cancers has evolved to limit exposure. Development of newer, more effective systemic therapies has also helped reduce reliance on radiation therapy. Still, radiation continues to have a significant role in the management of some childhood cancers.

"We don't want to use it, but we still have to think about cure," she said. "We're constantly trying to push that envelope in our clinical trials."

The study involved data from the national Childhood Cancer Survivor Studyopens in a new tab or window, launched more than 30 years ago to follow childhood cancer survivors for long-term health outcomes. Data analysis included 7,490 survivors older than 50. Outcomes of interest included all-cause and cause-specific mortality, new cancers, chronic health conditions, and health status. Survival was calculated in terms of standardized mortality ratios (SMRs), and new cancers and other conditions were calculated in terms of standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) and relative rates (RRs).

The results showed that 897 patients died after age 50, representing mortality risks of 8.6% at 5 years, 18.4% at 10 years, and 32.7% at 15 years. The mortality rates translated into an SMR of 3.2 (95% CI 3.0-3.4) versus the general U.S. population. Cause-specific mortality was highest among patients with new cancers (SMR 4.7, 95% CI 4.2-5.2).

A subgroup analysis showed that survivors whose treatment did not include radiation therapy had a similar cancer incidence as the general population. The fraction of new cancers attributable to radiation therapy was 40%.

The risk of severe, life-threatening, or fatal chronic conditions was more than twice as high among the cancer survivors as compared with siblings (RR 2.6, 95% CI 2.2-3.1), tripling for the risk of multiple chronic conditions (RR 3.3, 95% CI 2.5-4.4). Again, the risk was highest among survivors whose prior treatment included exposure to radiation therapy. The data showed no association between chemotherapy and late health outcomes.

"This really highlights the importance of a patient having a relationship with a survivorship program as well as their primary care providers," said Bhandari. "There are still things we need to continue to screen for and be aware of, both in younger and older survivors."

"As we continue to have this growing population [of cancer survivors], there are implications for our health policy, to make sure that we are equipped to best take care of these patients," she added.

Disclosures

The study was supported by the National Cancer Institute and the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities.

Bhandari reported no relevant financial disclosures.

One or more co-authors reported relationships with Wolters Kluwer, Maia Oncology, GRAIL, Shionogi, Movember Foundation, Pfizer, and Executive Insight Healthcare Consultants.

Henderson has disclosed a relationship with Pfizer.

'Removing Duplicate Enrollees From Medicaid, ACA Plans Is Not as Easy as You'd Think'

 The Trump administration's plan to identify

opens in a new tab or window and disenroll people who are enrolled in more than one federal or state-sponsored health plan is leaving several unanswered questions for policy experts.

In its announcement last month, HHS said a recent analysis of 2024 enrollment data found that there were approximately 2.8 million people "either enrolled in Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) in multiple states or simultaneously enrolled in both Medicaid/CHIP and a subsidized Affordable Care Act (ACA) exchange plan."

CMS "is taking action to ensure individuals are only enrolled in one program and to stop the federal government from paying multiple times for these individuals to receive health coverage," the press release said. It also quoted HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who said that "Under the Trump administration, we will no longer tolerate waste, fraud, and abuse at the expense of our most vulnerable citizens."

Some experts are skeptical, however. "The press release doesn't provide much in the way of information," Edwin Park, JD, research professor at Georgetown University's Center for Children and Families, in Washington, D.C., said in an email. For one thing, he said, many states were still completing the "unwinding" -- or disenrollment -- of Medicaid beneficiaries who were required to be kept on the Medicaid rolls during the COVID-19 public health emergency.

In addition, "we don't know how long a single individual was enrolled in multiple plans -- since it takes time for a state to disenroll an individual and to enroll an individual (and that's especially the case for [ACA] marketplace plans where individuals don't get enrolled until the first of the next month), there may be nothing inappropriate," he said. "There needs to be a lot more granular data."

Multiple Enrollments in Medicaid, CHIP, and ACA Plans

Getting rid of these duplicate enrollments would save the federal government an estimated $14 billion annually, HHS said. The agency outlined several strategies for finding these duplicate enrollees, including:

  • Providing states with a list of people who are enrolled in Medicaid or CHIP in two or more states and asking states to recheck their Medicaid or CHIP eligibility.
  • Notifying people who are enrolled in both Medicaid or CHIP and a federally run ACA insurance exchange plan with a subsidy. CMS has already notified these enrollees, who have been asked to disenroll from Medicaid or CHIP if they're no longer eligible, end their subsidy (as well as their coverage if they would like), or tell the exchange that the information is not correct and provide documentation that they are not enrolled in two plans. After 30 days, the exchange will end the subsidy for those who seem to be enrolled in more than one plan.
  • Identifying people enrolled in both Medicaid or CHIP and a state-run ACA exchange plan. CMS will give the state exchanges a list of those potentially enrolled in the two types of plans and "ask [the exchanges] to determine whether these individuals are dually enrolled," according to the release.

"CMS will work with states to prevent individuals from losing coverage inappropriately," the release said.

Several Possible Causes

Duplicate enrollment can occur for various reasons, America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), a trade group for health insurers, said in a March blog postopens in a new tab or window. "Complex individual circumstances can result in multiple residence changes for some beneficiaries," the post said. "For example, people experiencing chronic homelessness or in unstable housing situations, seasonal employees, people with frequent job changes, and/or people suffering from illnesses may relocate more often, resulting in lags to updated data."

In addition, "from 2019 to 2021, COVID-19 created a higher-than-average level of movement among beneficiaries, both across states lines as well as between and among coverage markets, straining states' administrative resources. Pauses on routine eligibility redeterminations further contributed to temporary instances of concurrent enrollments," the post said. Experts in this area also have noted that, for a time, there was a lack of regular data connectivity between the ACA marketplaces and state Medicaid systems, although that has since been resolved.

Is the government's estimate of 2.8 million potential dual enrollees reasonable? Clay Farris, MHS, founder of the consulting firm Mostly Medicaid, in Birmingham, Alabama, thinks it probably is. "I absolutely can verify this has been going on a long time," he said in a phone interview. "I'm in no way surprised to see numbers like 2.8 million," based on the numbers he has seen in the states he has worked with on the issue.

'Nobody Wants to Be the Bad Guy'

The biggest problem, said Farris -- who has consulted for state Medicaid agencies -- is that "nobody wants to be the bad guy." If someone is enrolled in several states' Medicaid plans, "none of them want to do the work to kick them off, because then you've got to go through various notification processes and what if [the person] appeals, and all this other kind of stuff," he said. Some years back, in one state Farris worked with, "we would give them several tens of thousands every quarter" of potential duplicate enrollees, "and they didn't want to do anything." There is also little interest on the part of Medicaid managed care plans, which get paid a per-capita amount for each enrollee regardless of how much -- or how little -- care they use, he said.

There are, however, other actions states are more interested in, he added. For example, if the state found out that someone was enrolled in both a managed care plan and was in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health system, "we actually ended up sending letters to some of the members who had VA coverage, saying, 'Hey, look, you might not know it, but you've actually got better drug coverage through your Veterans Affairs benefit ... so stop using your Medicaid [coverage] for drugs.'"

States may be loathe to look into the duplicate enrollment problem for other reasons too, Joe Antos, PhD, senior fellow emeritus at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C., said in an email. "Since the states use state-directed payments and various tax schemes to increase the federal share [of money they receive], they have little incentive to correct their records or disenroll people who already have coverage elsewhere," he said. "Moreover, sorting this out would be difficult -- even with duplicate enrollments identified by CMS, the state would have to track people down and verify their residence, eligibility for programs, etc. States would also have to cooperate with each other to determine whether multiple enrollment in state Medicaid programs is real or an accounting error."

Because of this, even if it's true that there are 2.8 million duplicate enrollees, "getting $14 billion out of the system is extremely optimistic," Antos added. "There would also be a considerable lag between identifying potential multiple enrollees and actually reducing federal subsidy payments that are incorrect."

That being said, however, "multiple enrollment is a real problem," he concluded. "Going from data analysis to solving the problem is a big leap that would take years of effort and require better management by both states and the federal government on an ongoing basis. It's unclear that either side would be fully committed to this effort over the long term."

https://www.medpagetoday.com/publichealthpolicy/medicaid/117029

How Gender-Extremism Group Pressures Hospitals To Damage Children

 A new report details how the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest LGBT lobby, pressures hospitals into child genital mutilation and castration.

A new report from Do No Harm (DNH) titled, “How the Human Rights Campaign’s Healthcare Equality Index Infects Pediatric Hospitals with Gender Ideology,” details how HRC and its charity branch, the Human Rights Campaign Foundation (HRCF), uses a scoring index to measure a hospital’s “compliance with various tenets of gender ideology.” Hospitals lose points if they do not offer or encourage dangerous and anti-human transgender procedures such as male genital amputation, breast amputation, and fake genital construction for children.

“It is time to expose and root out the Human Rights Campaign’s vast influence over healthcare systems. Our report sheds light on how the HRC weaponized its so-called ‘Healthcare Equality Index’ to pressure pediatric hospitals into chemically and surgically castrating children,” said report author Kurt Miceli, MD, in a statement. “By capitulating to the HRC’s political scheme, hospitals have utterly betrayed patients, especially children struggling with gender dysphoria. If health systems care about providing high-quality pediatric care, then they should distance themselves from the HRC and its Index.”

According to the report, 41 children’s hospitals and numerous pediatric operations inside different health systems have actually asked for HRC approval by participating fully with the harmful criteria in its Healthcare Equality Index (HEI).

The HEI is the hospital version of a broader pressure campaign HRC puts on schools, corporations, and others to comply with anti-reality sexual ideology. That index uses five criteria: “Non-Discrimination and Staff Training,” “Patient Services and Support,” “Employee Benefits and Policies,” “Patient and Community Engagement,” and “Responsible Citizenship.”

When it started in 2008, the HEI had 88 participants. In 2024, 1,065 facilities participated. The index primarily targets “inpatient facilities that provide general medical and surgical care.”

Health facilities can win awards from the sexual extremist organization by obeying their policy demands. The top award is “LGBTQ+ Healthcare Equity Leader,” and second place is the “LGBTQ+ Healthcare Equity High Performer.” Ranking criteria include staff training, offering “transgender” medical services, and working toward starting a gender clinic if one does not already exist. Hospitals are also required to allow those claiming to be “transgender” to use the restrooms of their choice.

Among the requirements, the “responsible citizenship” criterion is probably the most influential, says the report. It is where the HRC can “deduct” points, for “major” minus-25 point reasons, or “minor” minus-five point reasons.

“The deduction of 25 points is for major offenses that come to the attention of the HRC Foundation,” HRC states, “such as revoking LGBTQ+ inclusive policies and practices or having policies in place and/or engaging in proven practices that are contrary to the organization’s written LGBTQ+ patient or employment policies…Fortunately, there are currently no healthcare facilities that have received this deduction.”

Ranking systems like these, the report says, is how HRC can bully doctors into compliance, and attempt to destroy them if they speak up about the harm done by queer medical interventions. Minor deductions occur if doctors or hospitals “either follow a religious directive or have a policy in place” that does not allow for procedures like elective hysterectomies or mastectomies for people with gender dysphoria. This means the policy penalizes hospitals for religious commitments.

HRC wrote a booklet with the 2024 name Supporting Transgender, Non-binary, and Gender-Expansive Children for parents and people who work with children ages five to ten, the Do No Harm report notes. The booklet claims young children, even “sometimes in preverbal stages,” can be different genders, no gender at all, or constantly changing their gender. It also claims a child’s “well-being depends on their ability to express their gender freely,” says the report.

That contradicts reality that is also confirmed by scientific research, such as the United Kingdom’s Cass Report, and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) comprehensive review of the medical interventions. Both detail the dangers, irreversible nature, and adverse outcomes of supporting a child in thinking he can be a different sex. Other Western countries have also independently written reports on the harms.

HRC’s manual also falsely claims a “lack of support” for mutilating children can cause them mental distress. That contradicts a finding from Finland, and mirrored all over the world, that 75 percent of would-be pediatric gender transition patients had “severe mental health problems” before displaying gender dysphoria.

“The HRC takes to heart the child-led model of pediatric gender medicine. Yet, the reality is that children and adolescents undergo significant cognitive development, particularly in areas of the brain responsible for impulse control, long-term planning, and understanding consequences,” the Do No Harm report states. “As a result, adolescents do not fully weigh irreversible outcomes, especially those resulting from sex trait modifications. Rather, they are quite susceptible to emotional and social influences.”

HRC advocates for putting children on puberty blockers to stop natural growth, and incorrectly states the effects of stunting a child’s puberty are not only “fully reversible,” but can actually “dramatically improve these children’s lives.”

HRC also published a guide to establish “comprehensive care clinics,” which streamline a child’s experience with doctors and “gender specialists” to more quickly push them toward “transition” drugs and ultimately mutilation surgery. According to Do No Harm, contact with “gender specialists” doubles the use of cross-sex hormones.

HRC also pushes their extremist, anti-reality ideology in schools, which can often be an incubator for, as the report puts it, a “social contagion and the increased prevalence of co-occurring mental illness in youth.” DNH suggests activist initiatives such as HRC’s “Welcoming Schools” program may be “largely responsible for the increase in the diagnosis of gender dysphoria.”

“Through the Trojan Horse of bullying prevention and by tapping into young children’s desire to please adults and empathize with their peers, the HRC introduces impressionable minds to confusing concepts of sexuality and gender,” DNH states.

The lobbying group also coerces large corporations into publicly opposing legislation that would protect children from genital mutilation and chemical castration using a similar “index” model for big businesses, the report notes. HRC does this with two other indexes, the “State Equality Index” and the “Corporate Equality Index.”

The first pressures companies to publicly oppose child protection legislation, and the other pressures the companies into internal policies that favor cross-sex intervention. To earn a higher score on these indexes, businesses must implement and encourage LGBT policies that endanger children.

The Corporate Equality Index requires companies to offer “transgender inclusive health care coverage,” which means paying for puberty blockers and often other transgender procedures. As of 2024, 1,449 companies employing more than 22 million people have decided to participate in HRC’s pressure campaign that encourages self-mutilation, child mutilation, and other coarsening effects on American private and public life.

Breccan F. Thies is a correspondent for The Federalist. He previously covered education and culture issues for the Washington Examiner and Breitbart News. He holds a degree from the University of Virginia and is a 2022 Claremont Institute Publius Fellow. You can follow him on X: @BreccanFThies.

DOGE's AI Tool 'SweetREX' Set To Take Buzzsaw To Federal Regulations

 Following Elon Musk’s exit from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Democrats and mainstream media have largely turned their attention elsewhere. Yet, DOGE is quietly making steady progress on an ambitious plan to overhaul federal regulations, according to a report.

Central to the effort is an AI tool under development, the SweetREX Deregulation AI Plan Builder (SweetREX DAIP), designed to “promote prudent financial management and alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens.”

The little-known project is being spearheaded by Christopher Sweet, a DOGE staffer initially presented as a “special assistant,” who was, until recently, a third-year student at the University of Chicago.

WIRED reports:

SweetREX was developed by associates of DOGE operating out of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The plan is to roll it out to other US agencies. Members of the call included staffers from across the government, including the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of State, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, among others.

Leading Wednesday's call alongside Sweet was Scott Langmack, a DOGE-affiliated senior adviser at HUD and, according to his LinkedIn profile, the COO of technology company Kukun. (WIRED previously reported that he had application-level access to critical HUD systems; Kukun is a proptech firm that is, according to its website, “on a long-term mission to aggregate the hardest to find data.”) While Sweet led the development side of SweetREX, Langmack said he was taking point on demoing the tool for different agencies and pitching them on its benefits.

DOGE is likely to use the AI tool to eliminate up to 50% of 200,000 federal regulations by January 2026. A DOGE PowerPoint presentation, titled the “DOGE Deregulation Opportunity,” projects that the effort could yield $3.3 trillion annually in economic benefits.

“The DOGE experts creating these plans are the best and brightest in the business and are embarking on a never-before-attempted transformation of government systems and operations to enhance efficiency and effectiveness,” an administration spokesperson told the Washington Post, which first reported on the DOGE presentation.

On Tuesday, a federal appeals court cleared a key hurdle for DOGE, rejecting a labor union effort to restrict the agency’s access to sensitive U.S. user data from government agencies. In a 2-1 decision, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a lower court’s injunction that had blocked DOGE from accessing data held by the U.S. Department of Education, Treasury Department, and Office of Personnel Management, citing potential violations of federal privacy laws, according to Fox News.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/doges-ai-tool-sweetrex-set-take-buzzsaw-federal-regulations