Loading
Loading

president at Chicago (7) · where the Board comes from
Sep 1, 2007 – Jan 8, 2023
Economist · Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
Terminal: PhD · economics
Messrs. Evans and Kashkari dissented because they preferred to maintain the existing target range for the federal funds rate at this meeting. In Mr. Evans's view, with inflation continuing to run substantially below 2 percent and measures of inflation expectations lower than he believed to be consistent with a symmetric 2 percent inflation objective, it was important to pause in the process of policy normalization. Leaving the target range at 1 to 1-1/4 percent for a time would better support an increase in inflation expectations, increase the likelihood that inflation will rise to 2 percent and perhaps modestly beyond, and thus provide more support for the symmetry of the Committee's inflation objective. Such a pause also would better allow the Committee time to assess the degree to which earlier soft readings on inflation were transitory or more persistent.
Mr. Evans dissented because he continued to view additional policy accommodation as appropriate in circumstances where his outlook was for growth to be too slow to make sufficient progress in reducing the unemployment rate and for inflation to drop below levels consistent with the Committee's dual mandate. He continued to support the use of more-explicit forward guidance about the economic conditions under which the federal funds rate could be maintained in its current range, and he suggested that
Mr. Evans dissented because he saw the high unemployment rate and the outlook for only weak economic growth as calling for additional policy accommodation at this meeting. Moreover, the longer the current situation of low resource utilization lasted, the more the economy's longer-term growth potential could be impaired. Furthermore, given current policy, his outlook was for inflation to come in below levels consistent with the Committee's dual mandate, bolstering the case for additional monetary easing at this time. He also believed policies with more-explicit forward guidance about the economic conditions under which exceptionally low levels of the funds rate could be maintained would improve the prospects for growth and employment and, while possibly admitting somewhat higher inflation for a time, would still safeguard price stability.