I am the FIRST!!!
regular 4 post ff
infinite scroll 4 pff
Testing our way out of the COVID-19 Delta surge
The recent surge of COVID-19 cases is strengthening the case for more frequent testing.
Why it matters: The more contagious Delta variant threatens the fuller reopening of offices and schools in the fall. But regular testing — especially with cheap and almost instantaneous tests — could help catch cases before they have a chance to spread.
Driving the news: President Biden reportedly plans to announce today that all civilian federal employees will need to be vaccinated, or submit to regular COVID-19 testing and adhere to other social distancing requirements.
- It's the latest sign that regular testing could emerge as a potential fallback for workplaces trying to reopen without full vaccination coverage.
- In New York, Citigroup is requiring unvaccinated employees to use an at-home rapid test three times a week, and wear masks in the office, while Goldman Sachs has begun regular testing for unvaccinated workers.
- In Delaware, health and education officials are working with the diagnostic company Quidel to bring rapid testing to the state's 350 schools for unvaccinated staff and students.
By the numbers: From a peak of more than 2.3 million COVID-19 tests a day in early January 2021, daily testing fell to fewer than 900,000 a day by mid-July.
- But testing numbers have risen somewhat in recent days, with pharmacies in high-spread states like Florida reporting a sharper increase.
- "The past 10 days have been going off the hook," says Barry Abraham, the president and COO of Empowered Diagnostics, a south Florida-based company that provides corporate COVID-19 testing. "The testing centers are going back to December numbers."
What they're saying: "The most important aspect of these tests is the rapid result," Michael Mina, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, told the New York Times last month.
- "Waiting two to three days for laboratory test results isn’t ideal when you need results quickly to make decisions about going to school, work or a social gathering," he said.
Between the lines: Germany, which got off to a much slower start vaccinating its population than the U.S., has managed to largely control its COVID-19 outbreak by making frequent rapid testing a requirement for almost any kind of indoor social activity.
- A recent study in the U.K. found that daily testing and contact tracing — even without isolation — kept students in school without increasing the virus' spread.
The other side: Some researchers worry that regular testing of the vaccinated would turn up cases that don't carry symptoms and aren't likely to spread, potentially leading to unnecessary disruption.
- Yes, but: On Tuesday the CDC changed part of its guidance, advising that vaccinated people should be tested if they come into close contact with a confirmed COVID-19 case.
- The fact that vaccinated people apparently can transmit the virus if they experience a breakthrough case supports the idea that more regular testing could be useful, especially if vaccine efficacy declines over time.
Be smart: Far and away the most effective way to reduce spread is to increase vaccine coverage. Even with breakthrough cases, the Delta surge is primarily a "pandemic of the unvaccinated," as CDC head Rochelle Walensky said last week.
- But with school and office reopenings potentially on the line, both policymakers and executives should keep in mind they're fighting a two-front war: encouraging the unvaxxed to get a shot, but also reassuring the vaccinated that a full return to public life is safe.
- Testing is one way to achieve the latter.
The fight for broadband cash heats up
Congress's infrastructure framework includes $65 billion for broadband, and now the real fight for internet dollars begins.
Why it matters: That record infusion of funding, spurred by the pandemic's spotlight on the digital divide, has the potential to make the White House's goal of connecting all Americans a reality — unless it gets mired in squabbling.
What's happening: The way that $65 billion will be divvied up is still very much in flux as the Senate considers how to turn the framework into legislation.
- "When you have a large pot of money, people are going to try to nibble away at it," Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) told Axios. "Of course, the larger question is we've got to get this built."
- To be sure, it's not clear if the bipartisan infrastructure plan will pass, and the legislative details have not been finalized.
Details: One key position King has staked out is that $40 billion of the funding should go to states to use for broadband, as envisioned by his bipartisan BRIDGE Act with Sens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Michael Bennet (D-Colo.).
- "I know that some are trying to change that, and we're going to do everything we can to maintain it because that's the way we think it should go," King told Axios.
- King said other funding could go to the U.S. Department of Agriculture for its broadband program, but notably not to the Federal Communications Commission for deployment.
- "The states know best what their problems are, where the gaps are and how best to address them," King said. "One of the problems with the FCC is their maps are lousy."
The other side: The FCC's latest mechanism for awarding broadband funding — reverse auctions in which providers compete against each other to win subsidies — gives taxpayers "more bang for the buck," said Ross Lieberman, senior vice president for government affairs at broadband company trade group ACA Connects.
- That's because competition between providers helps drive down the amount of subsidy necessary for deployment.
- "It seems now that there's more of a preference for grants, and I think that if that's going to be the way, we need to think carefully about how those mechanisms give out money, and are we going to be able to achieve as much as we want to," Lieberman said during a broadband event Tuesday hosted by ACA.
Where it stands: Industry groups are eager for more details about the agreement, but broadband trade group USTelecom and cable trade group NCTA already have similar priorities for spending:
- Target funding to areas that do not have broadband and will not have it through a recent FCC funding program. "Any infrastructure funding that is siphoned away from the effort to bring broadband to communities that do not have it will stall our efforts to reach the goal of 100% broadband connectivity in America," NCTA said in a statement.
- Create a permanent broadband subsidy program to help consumers who need it to afford internet service.
What they're saying: "This is a pivotal moment," USTelecom president Jonathan Spalter said in a statement. "With smart and targeted spending by Washington, getting us to universal connectivity is achievable.”
What to watch: A key question is how policymakers will address the affordability and adoption issues at play in the digital divide.
- A study commissioned by ACA found that, while roughly 12 million households lack access to the internet, 30 million households do not subscribe to home broadband.
- King says he'd like to see the bipartisan bill include money for digital equity, but doesn't believe a long-term subsidy to help pay for consumers' internet is the answer.
- "Frankly, I'm concerned about simply subsidizing rates because I don't think it's sustainable," King told Axios. "Economics and history tells us that all that will happen in that case is that the rates will eventually go up to absorb whatever the subsidy is and the rate-payer is no better off."
The bottom line: How and where the billions of dollars are spent could be the difference between success and failure in achieving universal broadband access.
GOP's culture-war strategy ensures race will be central to politics for years to come
With or without Donald J. Trump atop the party, the Republican strategy for the 2022 elections and beyond virtually assures race — and racism — will be central to political debate for years to come.
Why it matters: In an era when every topic seems to turn quickly to race, Republicans see this most divisive issue as either political necessity or an election-winner — including as it relates to voting laws, critical race theory, big-city crime, immigration and political correctness.
The big picture: These topics pit the mostly white GOP against the very diverse Democratic Party. It's unfolding in local school boards, national politics and on social media.
An Axios-Ipsos poll on race relations last month shows this starkly, Axios managing editor Margaret Talev writes:
- There's a massive gulf between how Republicans and Democrats view race — a 66-point gap on whether the U.S. must continue making changes to give Black Americans equal rights to white Americans.
- There's a 48-point gap on whether the events of the past year led to a realization there's still a lot of racism in the U.S. — and a 49-point gap on whether the protests were good for society.
Of all demographic groups, white people were the most resistant to structural reforms to address institutional racism — a gap driven by Republican sentiment.
- Chris Jackson of Ipsos Public Affairs says the GOP focus on race looks counterproductive at first, since a majority of Americans favor continued efforts to equalize the playing field for Black Americans.
- But the pollster said a closer look reveals that the GOP's focus is more strategic — around specific ideas that drive culture wars and could potentially move swing voters.
Here's where the GOP sees an opening: In our poll, just one in five white independents supports the "defund the police" movement.
- Half of white independents say the media exaggerates stories of police brutality and racism.
- Two in five white independents say social policies, including affirmative action, discriminate unfairly against white people.
- Those issues prime this slice of the electorate for messaging that paints Democrats as extreme on issues around race.
Between the lines: Republicans have at times played on racial fears for decades. It became more explicit in the Trump era.
Citadel and Robinhood CEOs will call for new stock trading rule at GameStop hearing
Players central to the GameStop market bonanza will call on Congress to shorten the time required for stock trades to settle, according to testimonies released ahead of their appearances at a Congressional hearing on Thursday.
Why it matters: A typically obscure part of stock trading is set to be among the issues at the forefront — as Robinhood and others look to deflect the anger that stemmed from the Reddit-fueled stock frenzy.
What they're saying: Billionaire Ken Griffinwill testify that there should only be one day between when a trade is executed and when it is settled — rather than the two business days it currently takes.
- Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev will go further, calling for trades to be settled in real-time.
- This would have allowed the company "to better react to periods of increased volatility in the markets without restricting the purchasing of securities," Tenev will claim to lawmakers.
Flashback: Tenev has said the sharp jump in the amount of cash required to post while the trades settled caused it to curb trading on its platform — a move that sparked anger from users and lawmakers.
Griffin, who owns Citadel Securities, will also defend the firm's outsized role in carrying out the stock market trades made on Robinhood's platform and elsewhere.
- "When others were unable or unwilling to handle the heavy volumes, Citadel Securities stepped up," Griffin will say.
- He will note the company executed 7.4 billion shares at the height of the trading mania on behalf of retail investors in one day — more than the average daily volume for the entire equities market in 2019.
Of note:Reddit CEO Steve Huffman, who's also set to testify, will defend r/WallStreetBets — the community that served as ground-zero for "meme stock" posts.
- Huffman says group activity "was well within normal parameters," and the group was not infiltrated by bots, foreign agents or bad actors.
- Reddit trader Keith Gill will tell Congress the idea he used social media to "promote GameStop stock to unwitting investors is preposterous."
Gabe Plotkin, CEO of Melvin Capital — a hedge fund targeted on r/WallStreetBets for its short position in GameStop — will say he was "personally humbled" by the efforts that drove up the stock price, while emphasizing the antisemitic language directed toward him.
- Per his testimony, Melvin closed out its GameStop short after six years last month. It received a cash infusion from Griffin-led hedge fund Citadel (and Point72) after suffering heavy losses.
Jennifer Schulp, a former official at financial regulator FINRA, will testify that the wild trading "did not present a systemic risk to the functioning of our markets."
- Schulp, who's currently with the Cato Institute, will also say that regulatory changes in response to the episode are likely unnecessary "in light of the minimal impact on the market's function."
Go deeper: Read their testimonies...
- Vlad Tenev, Robinhood CEO
- Steve Huffman, Reddit CEO
- Gabe Plotkin, Melvin Capital CEO
- Keith Gill aka Roaring Kitty and Deep F---ing Value
- Jennifer Schulp, Cato Institute



