Eric S. Rosengren

Mses. George and Mester and Mr. Rosengren dissented because they preferred to increase the target range for the federal funds rate by 25 basis points at this meeting.

Mr. Rosengren dissented because he viewed the decision to slow the pace of asset purchases at this meeting as premature. In his view, with the unemployment rate still elevated and the inflation rate well below the Committee's longer-run objective of 2 percent, changes in the asset purchase program should be postponed until incoming data more clearly indicate that economic growth is likely to be sustained above its potential rate. He saw the costs of delaying action at this meeting as likely to be small relative to the gains from promoting a faster return of both elements of the Committee's dual mandate to their longer-run objectives.

Mr. Rosengren dissented because he regarded the weakness in the incoming economic data and in the outlook for the economy as warranting a more aggressive policy response. In his view, the combination of a deteriorating housing sector, slowing consumer and business spending, high energy prices, and ill-functioning financial markets suggested heightened risk of continued economic weakness. In light of that possibility, a more decisive policy response was called for to minimize that risk. In any case, he felt that well-anchored inflation expectations and the Committee's ability to reverse course on policy would limit the inflation risks of a larger easing move, should the economy instead prove significantly stronger than anticipated.