What to Expect When Janet Yellen Meets the Press

Her first move as head of the Fed’s policy-setting committee is probably going to be overseeing a change in how the Fed talks about its plans to raise interest rates.

Federal Reserve Board Chairman Janet Yellen testifies during a Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee hearing on Capitol Hill, February 27, 2014 in Washington, DC.
National Journal
Catherine Hollander
See more stories about...
Catherine Hollander
March 18, 2014, 3:37 p.m.

On Wed­nes­day, Janet Yel­len will be­come the second Fed­er­al Re­serve chair in his­tory to take ques­tions from the press.

She’s not ex­actly an un­fa­mil­i­ar face; Yel­len has been in the spot­light for months now. She was nom­in­ated to re­place Ben Bernanke as the Fed­er­al Re­serve chair in Oc­to­ber, ap­peared be­fore Con­gress in Novem­ber, and took the reins of the cent­ral bank on Feb. 1. Her life has been thor­oughly picked over and pub­li­cized; The New York Times even dug up a copy of an in­ter­view she con­duc­ted with her­self when she was a seni­or in high school in 1963 and gradu­at­ing as both head of the school pa­per and class va­le­dictori­an. (” ‘Just a minute,’ said Janet ab­ruptly, ‘I’m think­ing.””)

But this week marks the first time since her nom­in­a­tion that Yel­len will have to an­swer ques­tions, in real time and on live tele­vi­sion broad­cast up and down Wall Street, from a group of re­port­ers. She has giv­en one in­ter­view since be­com­ing Pres­id­ent Obama’s pick to run the Fed, with Time magazine in Janu­ary. If the 12 past press con­fer­ences hos­ted by Bernanke are any in­dic­a­tion, she’ll be asked ap­prox­im­ately 40 ques­tions in an hour-long press con­fer­ence sched­uled for Wed­nes­day af­ter­noon.

The biggest news of the day might come be­fore Yel­len even de­liv­ers her open­ing state­ment. Shortly be­fore the press con­fer­ence be­gins, the Fed will re­lease its policy state­ment. Eco­nom­ists widely ex­pect the cent­ral bank to cut its $65 bil­lion-a-month as­set-pur­chase pro­gram, in­ten­ded to bring down long-term in­terest rates, by an ad­di­tion­al $10 bil­lion as part of a gradu­al pro­cess to un­wind the stim­u­lus bond-buy­ing pro­gram.

More sig­ni­fic­antly, the cent­ral bank could also ad­just its “for­ward guid­ance,” which is the way it com­mu­nic­ates its plans for rais­ing in­terest rates. The Fed has one key in­terest rate, the fed­er­al funds rate, whose move­ment up and down ripples through in­terest rates across the eco­nomy. The goal of “for­ward guid­ance” is to bring down long-term in­terest rates by pledging to keep this short-term rate low for a long time. The Fed said in its Janu­ary policy state­ment that it would likely keep this rate near zero, where it has been since Decem­ber 2008, “well past the time that the un­em­ploy­ment rate de­clines be­low 6-1/2 per­cent, es­pe­cially if pro­jec­ted in­fla­tion con­tin­ues to run be­low the Com­mit­tee’s 2 per­cent longer-run goal.”

The un­em­ploy­ment rate is now 6.7 per­cent, and Fed of­fi­cials have been de­scrib­ing the 6.5 per­cent tar­get as passe. The Fed might drop its threshold to 6 per­cent to make it clear it thinks the cur­rent eco­nom­ic con­di­tions don’t mer­it high­er in­terest rates. Deutsche Bank eco­nom­ists think the Fed is likely to aban­don nu­mer­ic­al tar­gets in fa­vor of a fo­cus on a “broad­er ar­ray” of labor mar­ket in­dic­at­ors, such as payroll growth, and how many people are quit­ting their jobs, on Wed­nes­day. “When two FOMC mem­bers who have his­tor­ic­ally been on op­pos­ite ends of the mon­et­ary spec­trum are in agree­ment just days ahead of the FOMC meet­ing, it is ex­tremely note­worthy,” the Deutsche Bank eco­nom­ists wrote in a cli­ent note last week, point­ing to re­cent re­marks from Phil­adelphia Fed Pres­id­ent Charles Plosser, a mon­et­ary-policy hawk, and New York Fed Pres­id­ent Wil­li­am Dud­ley, a dove, in­dic­at­ing that the Fed’s cur­rent guid­ance was no longer a use­ful sig­nal to mar­kets and oth­ers.

Gold­man Sachs eco­nom­ists see the Fed chan­ging its guid­ance in one of two ways: Poli­cy­makers could keep the 6.5 per­cent threshold but make clear­er — in qual­it­at­ive terms — how the Fed will pro­ceed after it has been crossed, or they can switch en­tirely to qual­it­at­ive guid­ance, say­ing something like, “The Com­mit­tee in­tends to main­tain the cur­rent ex­cep­tion­ally low tar­get range for the fed­er­al funds rate of 0 to 1/4 per­cent as long as em­ploy­ment or in­fla­tion re­main well be­low their longer-run goals.” (The lat­ter ex­ample was giv­en in a Gold­man cli­ent note.)

The press con­fer­ence will provide a for­um for Yel­len to ex­plain the Fed’s de­cision on for­ward guid­ance, even if poli­cy­makers stick with the cur­rent lan­guage. Here are a couple of ad­di­tion­al places where Yel­len could be asked to fill in the blanks:

Old Man Winter. This winter has been bru­tal, as storm after storm has brought snow and sub­zero tem­per­at­ures to broad swaths of the coun­try. The tough con­di­tions have kept people from work, and are seen con­trib­ut­ing to a much weak­er-than-ex­pec­ted eco­nom­ic start to 2014. Last month, Yel­len told mem­bers of the Sen­ate Bank­ing Com­mit­tee, “I think it’s clear that … un­season­ably cold weath­er has played some role in much of [the re­cent soft data]. There are many ways in which weath­er would have af­fected these series. What we need to do and will be do­ing in the weeks ahead is to try to get a firmer handle on ex­actly how much of that set of soft data can be ex­plained by weath­er and what por­tion, if any, is due to a softer out­look.” The Fed’s latest eco­nom­ic pro­jec­tions, which will also be re­leased be­fore the news con­fer­ence, will provide a big-pic­ture over­view of how the cent­ral bank is read­ing the latest eco­nom­ic re­ports. Yel­len may be asked to get in­to the weeds about how the Fed has in­ter­preted the past few months of data, and wheth­er it’s ex­pect­ing it to bounce back once warm weath­er sweeps in this spring.

Is “too big to fail” alive and well? The policy state­ment re­leased after the Fed­er­al Open Mar­ket Com­mit­tee meets cov­ers only mon­et­ary policy and the eco­nom­ic out­look; it doesn’t tackle the Fed’s oth­er ma­jor role as a bank reg­u­lat­or. So ex­pect some ques­tions about the con­tinu­ing im­ple­ment­a­tion of the 2010 Dodd-Frank fin­an­cial re­form law (whose rules, ac­cord­ing to law firm Dav­is Polk & Ward­well, are just over halfway fi­nal­ized). A par­tic­u­larly key is­sue is that of “too big to fail,” the no­tion that some banks are so sys­tem­ic­ally im­port­ant that the gov­ern­ment would be as­sured to step in and help them out, rather than let them go un­der, if they got in trouble, as it did dur­ing the fin­an­cial crisis. “Ad­dress­ing ‘too big to fail’ has to be among the most im­port­ant goals of the post-crisis peri­od,” Yel­len said at her Sen­ate Bank­ing Com­mit­tee nom­in­a­tion hear­ing in Novem­ber. ” ‘Too big to fail’ is dam­aging. It cre­ates mor­al haz­ard. It cor­rodes mar­ket dis­cip­line. It cre­ates a threat to fin­an­cial sta­bil­ity and it does un­fairly, in my view, ad­vant­age large bank­ing firms over small ones.”

In Feb­ru­ary, though, she told the same com­mit­tee, “I’m not pos­it­ive that we can de­clare with con­fid­ence that ‘too big to fail’ has ended un­til it’s tested in some way.” She may be asked to elab­or­ate again on how she’s as­sess­ing the Fed’s ef­forts to ad­dress that is­sue, as well as the oth­er Dodd-Frank rules that still need to be fi­nal­ized.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
These (Supposed) Iowa and NH Escorts Tell All
2 hours ago
NATIONAL JOURNAL AFTER DARK

Before we get to the specifics of this exposé about escorts working the Iowa and New Hampshire primary crowds, let’s get three things out of the way: 1.) It’s from Cosmopolitan; 2.) most of the women quoted use fake (if colorful) names; and 3.) again, it’s from Cosmopolitan. That said, here’s what we learned:

  • Business was booming: one escort who says she typically gets two inquiries a weekend got 15 requests in the pre-primary weekend.
  • Their primary season clientele is a bit older than normal—”40s through mid-60s, compared with mostly twentysomething regulars” and “they’ve clearly done this before.”
  • They seemed more nervous than other clients, because “the stakes are higher when you’re working for a possible future president” but “all practiced impeccable manners.”
  • One escort “typically enjoy[s] the company of Democrats more, just because I feel like our views line up a lot more.”
Source:
STATE VS. FEDERAL
Restoring Some Sanity to Encryption
2 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

No matter where you stand on mandating companies to include a backdoor in encryption technologies, it doesn’t make sense to allow that decision to be made on a state level. “The problem with state-level legislation of this nature is that it manages to be both wildly impractical and entirely unenforceable,” writes Brian Barrett at Wired. There is a solution to this problem. “California Congressman Ted Lieu has introduced the ‘Ensuring National Constitutional Rights for Your Private Telecommunications Act of 2016,’ which we’ll call ENCRYPT. It’s a short, straightforward bill with a simple aim: to preempt states from attempting to implement their own anti-encryption policies at a state level.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
2 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Hillary Is Running Against the Bill of 1992
2 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The New Covenant. The Third Way. The Democratic Leadership Council style. Call it what you will, but whatever centrist triangulation Bill Clinton embraced in 1992, Hillary Clinton wants no part of it in 2016. Writing for Bloomberg, Sasha Issenberg and Margaret Talev explore how Hillary’s campaign has “diverged pointedly” from what made Bill so successful: “For Hillary to survive, Clintonism had to die.” Bill’s positions in 1992—from capital punishment to free trade—“represented a carefully calibrated diversion from the liberal orthodoxy of the previous decade.” But in New Hampshire, Hillary “worked to juggle nostalgia for past Clinton primary campaigns in the state with the fact that the Bill of 1992 or the Hillary of 2008 would likely be a marginal figure within today’s Democratic politics.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Trevor Noah Needs to Find His Voice. And Fast.
3 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

At first, “it was pleasant” to see Trevor Noah “smiling away and deeply dimpling in the Stewart seat, the seat that had lately grown gray hairs,” writes The Atlantic‘s James Parker in assessing the new host of the once-indispensable Daily Show. But where Jon Stewart was a heavyweight, Noah is “a very able lightweight, [who] needs time too. But he won’t get any. As a culture, we’re not about to nurture this talent, to give it room to grow. Our patience was exhausted long ago, by some other guy. We’re going to pass judgment and move on. There’s a reason Simon Cowell is so rich. Impress us today or get thee hence. So it comes to this: It’s now or never, Trevor.”

Source:
×