My colleagues and I remain squarely focused on achieving our dual mandate goals of maximum employment and stable prices for the benefit of the American people.
The economy is strong overall and has made significant progress toward our goals over the past two years.
The labor market has cooled from its formerly overheated state and remains solid.
Inflation has eased substantially from a peak of 7% to 2.1% as of September.
We are committed to maintaining our economy's strength by supporting maximum employment and returning inflation to our 2% goal.
Today, the FOMC decided to take another step in reducing the degree of policy restraint by lowering our policy interest rate by a quarter percentage point.
We continue to be confident that with an appropriate recalibration of our policy stance, strength in the economy and the labor market can be maintained, with inflation moving sustainably down to 2%.
We also decided to continue to reduce our securities holdings.
I'll have more to say about monetary policy after briefly reviewing economic developments.
Recent indicators suggest that economic activity has continued to expand at a solid pace.
GDP rose at an annual rate of 2.8% in the third quarter, about the same pace as in the second quarter.
Growth of consumer spending has remained resilient, and investment in equipment and intangibles has strengthened.
In contrast, activity in the housing sector has been weak.
Overall, improving supply conditions have supported the strong performance of the U.S. economy over the past year.
In the labor market, conditions remain solid.
Payroll job gains have slowed from earlier in the year, averaging $104,000 per month over the past three months.
This figure would have been somewhat higher were it not for the effects of labor strikes and hurricanes on employment in October.
Regarding the hurricanes, let me extend our sympathies to all the families, businesses, and communities who have been harmed by these devastating storms.
The unemployment rate is notably higher than it was a year ago, but it has edged down over the past three months and remains low at 4.1% in October.
Nominal wage growth has eased over the past year, and the jobs-to-workers gap has narrowed.
Overall, a broad set of indicators suggests that conditions in the labor market are now less tight than just before the pandemic in 2019.
The labor market is not a source of significant inflationary pressures.
Inflation has eased significantly over the past two years.
Total PCE prices rose 2.1% over the 12 months ending in September, excluding the volatile food and energy categories.
Core PCE prices rose 2.7%.
Overall, inflation has moved much closer to our 2% longer-run goal, but core inflation remains somewhat elevated.
Longer-term inflation expectations appear to remain well-anchored, as reflected in a broad range of surveys of households, businesses, and forecasters, as well as measures from financial markets.
Our monetary policy actions are guided by our dual mandate to promote maximum employment and stable prices for the American people.
We see the risks to achieving our employment and inflation goals as being roughly in balance, and we're attentive to the risks to both sides of our mandate.
At today's meeting, the committee decided to lower the target range for the federal funds rate by a quarter percentage point to 4.5 percent to 4.4 percent.
This further recalibration of our policy stance will help maintain the strength of the economy and the labor market and will continue to enable further progress on inflation as we move toward a more neutral stance over time.
We know that reducing policy restraint too quickly could hinder progress on inflation.
At the same time, reducing policy restraint too slowly could unduly weaken economic activity and employment.
In considering additional adjustments to the target range for the federal funds rate, the committee will carefully assess incoming data, the evolving outlook, and the balance of risks.
We are not on any preset course.
We will continue to make our decisions meeting by meeting.
As the economy evolves, monetary policy will adjust in order to best promote our maximum employment and price stability goals.
If the economy remains strong and inflation is not sustainably moving toward 2 percent, we can dial back policy restraint more slowly.
If the labor market were to weaken unexpectedly or inflation were to fall more quickly than anticipated, we can move more quickly.
Policy is well positioned to deal with the risks and uncertainties that we face in pursuing both sides of our dual mandate.
The Fed has been assigned two goals for monetary policy: maximum employment and stable prices.
We remain committed to supporting maximum employment, bringing inflation sustainably to our 2 percent goal, and keeping longer-term inflation expectations well anchored.
Our success in delivering on these goals matters to all Americans.
We understand that our actions affect communities, families, and businesses across the country.
Everything we do is in service to our public mission.
We at the Fed will do everything we can to achieve our maximum employment and price stability goals.
Thank you.
I look forward to our discussion.
Thank you.
Given the expectation that the election outcome will produce policies that would meaningfully impact the U.S. economy next year, how is the committee taking these proposals into account for upcoming decisions, including potentially the next one in December?
And can you give us any more sense of how proactive or reactive the Fed is prepared to be to changes in economic policies with the next administration?
Sure.
So let me say that in the near term, the election will have no effects on our policy decisions.
As you know, many, many things affect the economy, and anyone who writes down forecasts in their job will tell you that the economy is quite difficult to forecast looking out past the very near term.
Here, we don't know what the timing and substance of any policy changes will be.
We therefore don't know what the effects on the economy would be, specifically whether and to what extent those policies would matter for the achievement of our goal variables, maximum employment and price stability.
We don't guess, we don't speculate, and we don't assume.
Now, just in principle, it's possible that any administration's policies or policies put in place by Congress could have economic effects over time that would matter for our pursuit of our dual mandate goals.
So, along with countless other factors, forecasts of those economic effects would be included in our models of the economy and would be taken into account through that channel.
MR. Nick.
CHAIR POWELL.
Nick Timrose from the Wall Street Journal.
MR. Roughly one year ago, when the ten-year Treasury was flirting with 5 percent and third-year mortgage rates were near 8 percent, you noted how higher borrowing costs, if they were sustained, could weigh on economic activity.
Given that you have said you believe policy is restrictive and the Fed is now dialing back that restriction, are the growth risks presented by higher U.S. Treasury yields today any different from those you identified one year ago when inflation was still meaningfully above your target?
So I would just say this: we have watched the run-up in bond rates, and it's nowhere near where it was, of course, a year ago.
I guess the long bond rates are well below that level.
So we're watching that.
Things have been moving around, and we'll see where they settle.
I think it's too early to really say where they settle.
Ultimately, I'm sure we've all read these decompositions of what, you know, and I certainly have, but it's not really our job to provide our specific decomposition.
I will say, though, that it appears that the moves are not principally about higher inflation expectations.