Took this step to help keep the u. S. Economy strong in the face of some notable developments and to provide insurance against ongoing risks. The u. S. Economy has continued to perform well. We are into the 11th year of the economic expansion, and the baseline outlook remains favorable. The economy grew at a 2. 5 pace in the first half of the year. Household spending supported by a strong job market, rising incomes and solid Consumer Confidence has been the key driver of growth. In contrast, Business Investment and exports have weakened amid falling manufacturing output. The main reasons appear to be Slower Growth abroad and trade policy developments. Two sources of uncertainty we have been monitoring all year. Since the middle of last year, Global Growth outlook has weakened. Notably in europe and china. Additionally a number of geopolitical risks including brexit remain unresolved. Trade policy tensions have waxed and waned and elevated uncertainty is weighing on u. S. Investment and exports. Our business contacts around the country have been telling us that uncertainty about trade policy discouraged them from investing in their businesses. Busine even so, with Household Spending remaining on a solid footing and with support of financial conditions, we expect the economy to continue to expand at a moderate rate. As seen from fomc participants most recent projections, the meeting expectation for real gdp growth remains near 2 this year and next before edging down toward its estimated longer run value. The job market remains strong, the Unemployment Rate has been near half century lows for a year and a half, and job gains have remained solid in recent months. The pace of job gains has eased this year, but we had expected some slowing after last years strong pace. Participation in the labor force by people in their prime working years has been increasing. And wages have been rising, particularly for lower paying jobs. People who live and work in low and middle income communities tell us that many who have struggled to find work are now getting opportunities to add new and better chapters to their lives. This underscores for us the importance of sustaining the expansion so that the strong job market reaches more of those left behind. We expect the job market to remain strong. The median participants projections for the Unemployment Rate remains below 4 over the next several years. Inflation continues to run below our symmetric 2 objective. Total pce inflation was 1. 4 and core inflation, which excludes volatile food and energy prices, was 1. 6 . We still expect inflation to rise to 2 . The median projection is 1. 9 this year and 2 in 2021. However, inflation pressures clearly remain muted and indicators of longer term Inflation Expectations are at the lower end of their historical ranges. Were mindful that continued below target inflation could lead to an unwelcome downward slide in longer term Inflation Expectations. Overall, as we say in our post meeting statement, we continue to see sustained expansion of Economic Activity, strong labor market conditions, and inflation near our symmetric 2 objective as the most likely. While this has been our outlook for quite some time, our views about the path of Interest Rates that will best achieve these outcomes have changed significantly over the past year. As i mentioned, weakness in Global Growth and trade policy uncertainty have weighed on the economy and pose ongoing risks. These factors in conjunction with muted inflation pressures have led us to shift our reviews about appropriate Monetary Policy over time toward a lower path for the federal funds rate. And this shift has supported the outlook. Of course, this is the role of Monetary Policy to adjust Interest Rates to maintain a strong labor market, and keep inflation near our 2 objective. Todays decision to lower the federal funds rate target by a quarter to 1. 75 to 2 is appropriate in light of the Global Development i mentioned as well as muted inflation pressures. Since our last meeting, we have seen additional signs of weakness abroad and resurgence of trade policy tensions including the imposition of additional tariffs. The fed has no role when formulation of trade policy, but we take into account anything that could materially affect the economy relative to our employment and inflation roles. The future course of Monetary Policy, will depend on how the economy evolves, and what developments imply for the Economic Outlook and risks to the outlook. We often said policy is not on a preset course and thats the case today. As i noted, the baseline Economic Outlook remains positive. The projections of appropriate policy show that participants generally anticipate only modest changes in the federal funds rate over the next couple of years. Of course, those views are merely forecasts and as always will evolve with the arrival of new information. Let me say a few words about our Monetary Policy operations. Funding pressures in money markets were elevated this week and the effective federal funds rate rose above the top of its target range yesterday. While these issues are important for market functioning and Market Participants, they have no implications for the economy or the stance of Monetary Policy. This upward pressure emerged as funds flowed from the private sector to the treasury to meet Corporate Tax payments and subtle purchases of treasury securities. To counter the pressures, we conducted evernight repurchase operations yesterday and again today. These temporary operations were effective in relieving funding pressures and we expect the federal funds rate to move back in the target range. In addition, as we have done in the past, we made a technical adjustment to the Interest Rate paid on required and excess reserve balances, setting it 20 basis points below the top of the target range for the federal funds rate. And related action, we also adjusted the rate on overnight repurchase facility to five basis points below the bottom of the target range. We will continue to monitor market developments and conduct operations as necessary to foster trading in the federal funds market at rates within the target range. Consistent with our decision earlier this year to continue to implement Monetary Policy in an ample reserve regime, we will over time provide sufficient supply of reserves so that frequent operations are not required. To summarize, we are fully committed to pursuing our goals of maximum employment and stable prices as a committee contemplates the future path of a target range for a federal funds rate, it will continue to monitor the implications of incoming information for the Economic Outlook and will act as appropriate to sustain the expansion with a strong labor market and inflation near its symmetric 2 objective. Thanks. Ill be happy to take your questions. Marty with the associated press. Mr. Chairman, will you cut rates in july, you characterized it as a midcycle adjustment. Is that still your view of what is happening . So, as you can see from our policy statement, from the smp, we see a favorable Economic Outlook, with continued moderate growth, strong labor market and inflation near 2 objective. That view is consistent with those of many other forecasters. As you can see, fomc participants generally think the positive economic outcomes will be achieved with modest adjustments to the federal funds rate. At the last press conference i pointed to two episodes in 1995 and 1998 as examples of such an approach with successful in both of those instances. As our statement also highlights, though, there are risks to this positive outlook due to weak Global Growth and trade developments. If the economy does turn down, then a more extensive sequence of rate cuts could be appropriate. We dont see that, it is not what we expect. But we would certainly follow that path if it became appropriate. In other words, as we say in our statement, we will continue to monitor the developments closely and as appropriate to help ensure the expansion remains on track. Rich miller with bloomberg. Taking the statement, your opening remarks, im wondering what kind of message we should take from this. Do you still is it safe to say the fomc has an easing bias or not . The idea of i dont think a bias, a long time practice, we dont actually have that practice anymore. I cant really adopt it right here. But nonetheless ill respond to your question. So we did we made one decision today. And that decision was to lower the federal funds rate by a quarter percentage point. We believe that action is appropriate to promote our objectives, of course. Were going to be highly data dependent as always. Our decisions are going to depend on the implications of incoming information from the outlook. And i would also say as we often do that were not on a preset course. So thats how were going to look at it, look at economic data. Sometimes the path ahead is clear and sometimes less so. So were going to be looking carefully meeting by meeting, at the full range of information and were going to assess the appropriate stance of policy as we go and as i said we will act as appropriate to sustain expansion. Could just follow up, you also said that the favorable outlook is predicated on financial conditions and the financial conditions are in turn predicated on an outlook for fed policy, further cuts. Wouldnt that suggest that you should be inclined to if you want those financial conditions and favorable outlook to come about, you should be inclined to cut . Well, what we do Going Forward is preparing it is going to depend on the flow of data and information. We have seen, you know, if you look at the things were monitoring, particularly Global Growth and trade developments, Global Growth has continue to weaken, it weakened since our last meeting. Trade developments have been up and down and then up, i guess, or back up over the course of the meeting period. They have been quite volatile. We see those risks, more heightened now. Were going to be watching that carefully. Were also going to be watching the u. S. Data quite carefully and have to make an assessment as we go. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Nick timer of the wall street journal. I know youre trying to speak for the committee when you do these press conferences. But the committee is cheeri lcl divided about the outlook and the appropriate policy path. Some people think you need to wait and see the labor market and the consumer crack or weaken further before acting more aggressively. And some people think that by the time that happens, youll need to do even more aggressive action to arrest a downturn. Where do you stand on this . Well, let me just say, on the general point of diverse perspectives, youre right. Sometimes the there have been many of those times and by now almost eight years at the fed many times on the direction i was relatively clear and relatively easy to reach anonymity. This is a time of difficult judgments. As you can see, disparate perspectives. As i really do think thats nothing but healthy. And so i see a benefit in having those diverse perspectives, really. Your question though is your own view, the data is to some extent lagged. Especially when you have these risks on the horizon. And the markets obviously think these risks could materialize more than what you and your colleagues are projecting in the dock lock today. Where are your own views about the tension between Risk Management, which implies some degree of data dependence. I would try to get at it this way. I think the idea that if you see trouble approaching on the horizon, you steer away from it if you can. I think thats a good idea in principle. History teaches us that it is better to be proactive in adjusting policy if you can. I think applying that principle in a situation in a particular situation is where the challenge comes. So i told you where the committee, the bulk of the committee is going, meeting by meeting. I think the main take away is that this is a committee that has shifted its policy stance repeatedly, consistently through the course of the year to support Economic Activity as it is felt that it is appropriate. The beginning of the year, we were looking at further rate increases than we were patient. And then we cut once and we cut again. And i think youve seen us being willing to move based on data, based on the evolving risk picture. I have no reason to think that would change. It will continue to be data dependent and depend data includes the evolving risk picture. Thats where i am, thats why i think the bulk of the committee is. I wonder if your sorry, steve leaseman, cnbc. I wonder if youre concerned about how the Federal Reserve operated through the recent liquidity crunch in the markets. We talked to many traders who said the tax date payment was known well in advance, there were several reports where people pointing to september as a potential crunch time, you closed monday at the top end of the fed funds rate, tuesday came along and there wasnt an operation until 9 00 and no announcement until of a second operation until 4 00 in the afternoon. Was the fed listening to markets well ahead of time going back a year when there were blowouts in the overnight rate at year end and the turn of the year . Are you concerned about how, for example, the new york fed operated to this . I would say i doubt that anyone is closer to and has more invested in carefully following the behavior of these markets. So, of course, we were well aware of the tax payments and also of the settlement of the large bond purchases. And, you know, we were very much waiting for that. But we didnt expect the response to that was stronger than we expected. By the way, our sense is that it is a surprise Market Participants a lot too. People were writing about this and publishing stories about it weeks ago. Wasnt a surprise. It was a stronger response than certainly than we expected. So, no, im not concerned about that to answer your question. I can go on about how were looking at that. Why dont i do that . As i mentioned, we dont see this as having any implications for the broader economy or for the Economic Outlook, nor for o ability to control rates. It reflects forces we saw coming and they just had a bigger effect than i think most folks anticipated. Strong demand for cash to purchase. We took appropriate actions to address those pressures, to keep the fed funds rate and the measures were successful. If we experience another episode of pressures in money markets, we have the tools to address the pressures, we will not hesitate to use them. And since were talking about this, let me take a step back and say this, earlier in the year, as you all recall, after careful study over a period of years actually, the committee announced the decision to implement Monetary Policy and ample reserves regime. And we have been operating in that regime for a full decade, we think it works well to implement our rate decisions, and the main hallmark of the regime is we use adjustments in our administered rates, to keep the fed fund rates in the target range. It is designed specifically so we do not expect to conduct frequent Market Operations for that purpose. So Going Forward, were going to be very closely Monitoring Market developments and assessing the implications for the appropriate level of reserves. And were going to be assessing the question of when it will be appropriate to resume your organic growth of the Balance Sheet. Im sure well be revisiting that question during this intermeeting period and in our next meeting. Do you think you underestimated the amount of reserves necessary for the Banking System . So we have always said that it is the level is uncertain. And thats something we tried to be very clear about. And as you know we have invested lots of time talking to many of the large holders of reserves to assess their what they say is their demand for reserve. We try to assess what that is. We tried to combine it all together, put it out so the public can react to it. But, yes, there is real uncertainty and it is certainly possible that we will need to resume the organic growth of the Balance Sheet earlier than we thought. Thats always been a possibility and certainly is now. Well be looking at this care l carefully in the coming days and taking up at the next meeting. Brendan grillo with the financial times. Earlier this year or actually in september the government board put out a Research Paper looking, trying to quantify trade uncertainty. And it suggested that it could drag through the Business Investment channel on growth as much as a percentage point over the course of the next year. How much confidence do you have and the feds ability to estimate the real effects of trade uncertainty, and if you have confidence in that paper, it would seem to suggest a sort of more aggressively dovish path than the one youve chosen. I think to provide a little context, fed economists do research all the time. It is generally a very high quality. It is their research. It is not an official finding of the Federal Reserve board or the Federal Reserve system. It is just by the way, they put it out for public review, you can see their metrics, see all of it, review. You can see the work is exposed to critique. So its a great tradition that we have. This went after measuring trade policy uncertainty through a couple channels including concerning tariffs and the threat of more tariffs. It looked deeply at the data to try to assess the effects on output. While us would say directly answering your question, theres uncertainty around these affects. Its to try to isolate things is challenging. But we do the best we can. So this this pace piece of Research Found significant effects. Thats frankly consistent with a numb of other resource projects. Its consistent in the beige book. We feel trade uncertainty is having ab affect. Hard to quantify presicily though. I was struck by the anchored median federal funds through 2020. And that in comparison to the fact you have three groups of opinions around where the rate is is heading. Is it fair to say the opinions have become sort of firmer in their conviction and that its going to take some sort of real Material Change in the outlook now for that to move in either direction . Youre asking about 2020 . Its not moving through 2020 suggests these opinions are pretty well anchored right now in those groups. Honestly, its hard to have hardened expectations about where rate policy is going to be a year from now. The closer you get to the durnt day, the more confidence you can have. Knowing what the data will say and the way geopolitical events and other events will evolve in the next 90 days and the implication of the economy, theres a lot of uncertainty around it. Playerly if you look at 2020, i think the use of this is individual participants write down their forecasts. It should give you a sense of the likely path of the economy and the appropriate path for Monetary Policy for the individual persons thinking. Thats a dpood thing to know. I would be reluctant to look at hardened views or a prediction really. There were a number of arguments in july for cutting rates. Have those gotten weaker or changed . I think if you look at the u. S. Economy, its generally performed roughly as expected. Consumer spending at a healthy clip, i would say business fix investment and exports have weakened further and manufacturing pmi suggests more weakness ahead. The labor market is still strong. Generally that is the same. If you look at Global Economy, its weakened further in the eu and china. I think trade policy developments have been a big mover of markets and of sent isment. Thats what has happened over the period. Different people around the table have different p perspectives, as you obviously know. Im just curious on your Balance Sheet point. You talked about the committee and thinking about resuming organic growth over time. I guess the question is, if you have slunk your Balance Sheet maybe just a a little bit too small to the point that reserves are too scarce to get through the unusual periods, is organic growth in the Balance Sheet enough to get back to a point of ample reserves that can get us through those tough times or see something a little bit above that and is that a possibility the committee would consider . I think its hard to deal with every hypothetical possibility. For the foreseeable future, were going to be looking at if needed, doing the sorts of things we did the last two days. The temporary operations will be the tool we use. As we learn more, how much of this really has to do with the level of reserves. Another money market question. Banks have been pointing to acquitty rules to the volatility we have seen and potentially some capital rules as well. Are you all looking at whether some tweaks to the liquidity cover ratio might help and also what is the status of the net Stable Funding rule. Are you still planning on putting that out soon . I think if we concluded that we needed to raise the level of required reserves for banks to meet the lcr, we would probably raise the level of reserves rather than lower the lcr. Its not impossible to come to a view that the lcr is call bralted too high, but thats not something we think right now. More reserves might be needed and we are in a position to supply them. We put it out for comment and got comments and i believe we are looking at finalizing that in a relate tufly near future. Just to poll up in terms of tweaks to the lcr, theres also been talk about potentially giving banks some room in times of stress to dip into the lu kwidty buffers. I think we want banks to use their liquidity buffers in time of stress rather than pull back from serving their clients, as a general rule. Thank you. About a month ago, you said theres no precedent for trade uncertainty in a monetary poll i zit. Have you figured out how to incorporate trade unsurgeonty at a certain level into Monetary PolicyGoing Forward . My point really was that to start that trade policy is is not the business of the fed. Its the buzz of commerce and the administration so why are we talking about it . Our discussions suggest that trade policy is something thats weighing on the outlook. I pointed out in recent mark remarks that the thing we cant address is what businesses would like, which is a settled road map for trade. We cant do that. We dont have that tool. But we have a powerful tool to counteract weakness by supporting demand through sound Monetary Policy. With think our policy tools support Economic Activity through fairly well understood channels. By reducing interest burden and encouraging consumer purchase of durables, other sensitive items, by creating broadly more official b kps, which supports spending and investment by businesses and also by boosting household and Business Confidence. So i dont want to be said that our tools dont have an affect. They do. I was making the point that theres a piece of this we cant address. Its a challenge. Theres no simple bottom line answer where i us can say, yes, ive got it here. What it amounts to is this what you see is probably the kind of voluatility thats typical of a important, complex ongoing negotiation. What we need to do is to try to look through the volume tulty and react to the underlying forces, the underlying things that are happening that are relevant to our man taint. We dont have anything to do with setting trade policy or trade agreements. Were supposed to be reacting on behalf of the American Economy to support maximum employment and stable prices. We need to look through a pretty volatile situation. That means not overreacting and also means not underreacting. Thats what were trying to do. I would say the outlook is positive in face of the cross winds. So to some extent, i do believe they are shifting to a more accommodative stance. Michael mckey from Bloomberg Radio and television. Futures trading since the statement was released shows that investors still think another rate cut is coming this year. On their behalf, let me ask what is going to guide fed policy to either pull them towards where the plot suggests, no more moves this year or keep them in place. Are you reacting to data now . Are you reacting to your gut feeling about what trade tweets might mean . Should they just watch for jay powells speeches to decide whats going to happen Going Forward . Whats the feds reaction function now . Right, so what we are looking for through all of the data, all of the events that are going on around the world, well be looking at the evolving geopolitical events, Global Growth, the performance of the u. S. Economy. Well be looking for the things that are affecting the outlook for the u. S. Economy, particular ly the outlook as it relates to maximum employment and stable prices. So all those things in principle can affect the achievement of our goals. Its an unusual situation because the u. S. Economy itself, the largest part of it, the consumer part of it is in strong shape. The manufacturing part less so. You see an economy that gener generally forecasts show growths similar to our own forecasts coming in at 2 , which is a good, solid year. So the difference here is we have significant really risks to that outlook from not just the geopolitical events but slowing Global Growth and trade policy. Well be look iing a the all of that and also Financial Market conditions and how they are affect iing the outlook. Its a challenging time. I edadmit it we have to be openo all those things. Were not on a preset course. Were going to be making decisions meeting by meeting as we see this. And well try to be as transparent as we can. Chairman powell, with the rate cut today and adjustment coming down the road, do you worry about lessening the feds fire power should there be a are session and is there any set r scenario you would envision rates drifting lower to negative territory ask are there any other tools you could use before having to go there. In terms of fire power, the general principle is to hold on to the fire power until a downturn gains momentum. Then theres a fair amount of research that would show thats the case. I think that principle needs to be applied carefully to the situation at hand. What we believe were facing here is a situation that can be addressed and should be addressed with moderate adjustments for the funds rate. We are watching carefully to see thats the case. If the economy weakens more, we are prepared to be aggressive and well do so if it turns out to be appropriate. You mentioned negative Interest Rates. Negative Interest Rates is is something that we looked at. And chose not to do. After we got to the affective lower bound, we chose to do Forward Guidance and also large scale asset purchase. Those with the Monetary Policy tools we used. We feel they worked fairly well. And i think if we were to find ourselves at some future date at the effective lower bound, not something were expecting, then i think we would look at using large scale asset purchases and Forward Guidance. I do not think wed be looking at lower rates. I dont think those will be at the top of the list. We are in the middle of a monitory policy review where were looking through all of these questions about the longer run framework and tools and communications. We expect that to be completed some time around the middle of next year. Don lee with the l. A. Times. How much can you talk about the mechanism in which the two rate cuts would afesfect the real economy and how much to what extent will it offset the negative affects of a trade uncertainty and tensions . So in terms of how our rate cuts will affect the real economy, first, we think Monetary Policy works with a varnl lag. So the real effects would be felt overtime. But we think that lower Interest Rates will reduce interest burden for borrowers so that interest sensitive things like that, cars, homes, supports purchases of those. Again, broadly more accommodative financial conditions. Thats the models and data show thats another powerful channel. I also think theres a confidence channel. You see household and Business Confidence turn up when financial conditions become more accommodative. So i think through all of those channels, monitetary policy wor. It isnt precisely the right tool for every single possible negative thing that can happen to the economy, but nonetheless, it broadly works. Were going to use the tool we have. If it comes to it, well use all of the tools. So thats how we think it works. And how we think its working. Its tough to say. Well use our tools to justify set. You were the low Interest Rates are add iing to or could create a bubble of corporate debt that could make it more difficult for specially consumers to recover from the next recession or survive the next recession. If you look at households, households are in very strong shape. They are less levered. They have less debt. They have more income relative to the interest requirements. And they are in very good shape. Much better shape than they were in in the financial crisis. So the household sector as a sort of aggregate matter is in very good shape. That doesnt mean every Single Person in the household sector is in good shape, but overall, its not a concern. The business sector is something that we have talked about a the lot and studied a lot. The situation there is that the level of debt relative to gdp in the business sector is at a high level. So is the size of the business sector. So actually the business sector itself is not materially higher leverage than it was. Nonetheless, theres a lot of highly levered companies. Thats the kind of thing that happens during a long cycle when there arent downturns for now into our 11th year. You get that kind of phenomenon in a long cycle. Thats something were monitoring. I think our view is still that thats a real issue, but what it really represents is a potential amplifier of a macroeconomic downturn. It does not have the makings of anything that would undermine the the workings of the Financial System or itself create a shock that would turn the economy down. Its more of an amplifier. We take it seriously. Were monitoring carefully. Were looking at the federal Financial Stability board. They are conducting a project now to identify where these loans are held all around the world. Its a subject of a lot of study and work and were trying to keep on top of it. Thank you, chairman. Hearing two things from you. Youre saying the economy is doing well, but theres this sense with people that the economy is exhaactually startin slow now. And people are more and more theres talk about recession. And even the fed thinks the Downside Risks are rise iing. So is the economy over the next year between now and the end of next year you think gdp growth is going to hold steady and the Unemployment Rate, can you talk about how do you see the economy evolve i evolving over the next year . I think and my colleagues and i think that the most likely case is for continue d moderate growth, continued strong labor market and inflation moving back up to 2 . Thats widely shared among forecasters. The issue is more the risks to that. You have Downside Risks here. We have talked about them. Global growth will have an affect on u. S. Growth over time. Less so than for many other economies. But theres a sector of our economy thats exposed to that. Trade policy uncertainty also has an affect. So you can see some weakness in the u. S. Economy because of all that. But nonetheless, the job of Monetary Policy is to adjust both to insurance against the Downside Risks, but to support the economy in light of the existing weakness that we see. As i mentioned, were not seeing a recession. Were not forecasting a recession. But we are adjusting Monetary Policy in a more accommodative direction to try to support what is, in fact, a favorable outlook. And the inverted yield curve that we hear is is the bond market signaling recession. That signal is not pertinent to you . We monitor the yield curve carefully along with a large wide range of financial conditions. Theres no one thing that is among all financial conditions. The yield curve is something that we follow carefully. And again, based on the asset setsment of the data, we think its a a positive outlook. The to talk about the current situation, you saw the longterm rates move down a whole lot and then retrace twothirds of that move in the space of a few days. What really matters for all financial conditions generally is when there are changes that are sustained for a period of time. Why are longterm rates low . There can be a signal of expectations about growth, but there can also just be low term premiums. It can just be that theres this large quantity of negative yielding and very low yielding sovereign debt around the world and thats exerting downward pressure on u. S. Sovereign rates without necessarily having ab independent signal. Thats a wesignal of weak globa growth and how it would affect us. So Global Capital markets and the Global Economy are integrated. So this is something we are not going to be dismissive about the yield curve. You can tell on the committee theres a range of views. Theres some who were focused on the yield curve. Others, not so much. From my perspective, you watch it carefully and you need to be asking yourself a lot of questions if the yield curve as to why that is and how long its sustained. Chairman, paul kernen. You mentioned trade policy being a complex ongoing discussion. What is your rule for stopping as far as Interest Rates cuts go. The median dot suggests no more rate cut, but if we get continued back and forth trade policy uncertainty is going to remain heightened. So under what circumstances would you say i think we have cut enough. We stop now. And secondly, as leader of this institution, have you felt a need to take any steps to boost like employee moral at a time when the president is constantly criticizing the fed . I would love to articulate, but its going to be when we think we have done enough. Were watching the situation. We cut rates twice. And we see ourselves as taking actions to sustain the expansion. So i dont have a specific role for you, but were watching carefully. There will come a time when we think we have done enough. There may come a time when the economy worsens and we would have to cut more aggressively. We dont know. Well be watching carefully. The data and evolving situation and thats whats going to guide our on that path. I would ta moral is high. We feel like were doing the best job we can serving the american people. Its been reported that the cfbp is investing bank of america for opening unauthorized accounts. I wonder if the fed is investigating this and given the pending order against wells fargo if youre concerned the banks are too big to manage. I saw the headline this morning during all the preparation. I dont have anything on that. I will say there were quite wide breakdowns in Risk Management which resulted in mistreatment of consumers that we know was quite harmful. I have no idea what happened at bnk of america. I dont know. Steve becker in for npr freelance. The fed and your fellow Central Banks have been exploring the far reaches of whats possible for Monetary Policy. Even going so far as to make rates negative in some cases with mixed results. Meanwhile, fiscal and regulatory not to mention trade policy or pursuing their own separate courses. As you and your colleagues do this Monetary Policy framework review, do you ever consider limitations of Monetary Policy should you be r more explicit about what Monetary Policy can and cannot do in this environment. We try to be clear about this. Its our to use the tools to achieve and do the jobs that congress assigned us. Which is achieve maximum employment and stable prices. Thats our real job. In terms of give iing the fisca authorities, who are the ones who created us, advice about how to do their job, we keep that at a high level. And at a high level, i have said before that its really fiscal policy thats more powerful and has much more to do with fiscal policy can do those things that will increase the longer run growth rate of the United States by improving productivity and Labor Force Participation and the skills and aptitudes of workers. All that comes from the private sector. But also from more of the kinds of things that can be done with fiscal policy. Over the long run, we cant really affect the growth rate of the United States. The potential growth rate of the United States is not a function of Monetary Policy. Its a function of other things. So i try to be clear about that. And so ultimately, fiscal authorities will do what they deem appropriate. Bbc news. Trump has been a very vocal critic of you and r your colleagues recently calling you bone heads and just now has called you a terrible communicator. How do you respond to these criticisms and any regrets to have this many press conferences . I dont. Im not going to change my practice here today of not responding to comments or addressing comments made by elected officials. I will say that i continue to believe that the undependence of the Federal Reserve from direct political control has served the public well over time. And i assure you that my colleagues and i will continue to conduct Monetary Policy without regard to political considerations. Were going to use our best judgment based on facts, evidence and objective analysis in pursuing our goals and thats what i have to say on it. Thank you for taking my question. As you saw with falling yields until the beginning of this month, theres been a the lot of demand for u. S. Treasuries and that was partly to blame for the liquidity crunch we saw this week. Does the fed have concerns over the impacts of a global glut . Is that a conversation you have with treasury secretary about what the proper way to address some of the challenges down the road with that type of heavy interest globally. Not really, no. Thats really treasurys job and congresss job. In terms of while theres how much to spend and how big the deficits are and how to finance it. None of that calls for advice from the fed. We take fiscal policy pretty much to our work. That doesnt stop us from time to time from saying that we think its important that the u. S. Fiscal picture return to a sustainable footing. And right now its not. Thats been the case for a long time. Thats something well have to address and a good time to do it is when the economy is strong. So we limit ourselves to statements like that. Heather long from the washington post. Mr. Chairman, in your view, is there any risk to the United States having much higher Interest Rates than europe and japan and other parts of the world . Is there any risk to the u. S. Economy to that divergence or risk to the the Global Economy . So i guess i would say it this way. Its Global Markets are highly integrated. Hour rates are long rates are definitely being pulled down by the very, very low rates that are abroad. And we dont characterize it like that. The low rates abroad are a symbol or a sign, rather, of a weak Global Growth. Expectations of low inflation, low growth and its just a lack of policy space to move against. Who how to break out of that. That implication is for us. In a world where economies and Financial Markets are tightly integrated, that matters for the u. S. Economy. So thats going to pull down u. S. Rates and u. S. Financial conditions can tighten because of that. So i think we put all of that goes into our thinking and into our models. We do understand how the International Sector faces with the u. S. Economy. We take that into account in setting our Interest Rate policy. Thank you very much. As the News Conference got started, President Trump tweeted jay powell and the Federal Reserve fail again. No guts, no sense is, no vision. A terrible communicator. This was in response to chairman powells announcement that the Federal Reserve cut Interest Rates by another quarter point. Heres a look at our prime time schedule on the cspan networks. Starting at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan, the House Gun Violence Prevention Task force holds a meeting on gun background checks and the impact of gun violence on children. On c sparks 2, Migrant Children being held by the reis the thement office and cspan 3, two congressional committees hear testimony from Young Leaders of organizations focused on combatting climate change. Tomorrow eugene scalia, the son of the Supreme CourtJustice Antonin Scalia testifiesover his nomination to serve as the next labor secretary. That starts live thursday at 9 00 a. M. Eastern on cspan 3. President trump and First Lady Melania Trump will host the second state dinner of his administration as we welcomes the australian Prime Minister and his wife. Watch guest arrivals and dinner toasts. Live coverage begins friday at 6 30 p. M. Eastern on cspan, online at cspan. Org or listen on the free cspan radio app. Cspan is back in des moines, iowa, this saturday for Live Campaign 2020 coverage of the poke county democrats annual steak fry at 2 00 p. M. Eastern where 18 president ial candidates will take the stage for speeches. Watch live on cspan, cspan. Org or listen live on the go using the free cspan radio app preponderance. I tell Bernie Sanders voters all the time i defy you to say you care more about poor people than i do because you dont. I defy you to say you care more about access to health care than i do, because you dont. I defy you to say you care more about educating poor kids than i do because you dont. But we have very Different Solutions about how to get there. Kay kroels james on her life, career in government and po politics and her work as president of the Heritage Foundation think tank. Sunday night at 8 00 p. M. Eastern. On cspans q a. Now the Congressional Executive Commission on china hears about recent hong kong protests and the future of u. S. Relations with china and hong kong. Witnesses looked at the escalating violence and threats by the Chinese Government against the hong kong activists. This is close to three hours