The following FOMC participants spoke: Bullard, George, Harker, Lockhart, Mester, Kaplan, and Kashkari. There were several themes across last week’s speeches and interviews.
The first was that FOMC participants generally downplayed any effect of Brexit on the near-term U.S. outlook. Harker, for example, said “Brexit is low on my list of risks.” Lockhart said “I have no basis—statistical or anecdotal—for assuming any significant change in economic momentum [since Brexit].” Bullard went further, saying, “it’s probably going to be zero impact on the U.S.”
Second, a number of participants nevertheless noted that Brexit increased uncertainty about the U.S. and global outlooks, and the effect of this uncertainty might be the most important channel for any adverse effect. Mester said that “risks and uncertainty surrounding the outlook have increased,” and Lockhart said that “the vote outcome may be followed by a long tail of uncertainty” and therefore is a risk factor over the medium term that could amount to a “persistent economic headwind.”
I see two camps with respect to post-Brexit monetary policy. I will refer to one as the “patient” camp and the other as the “initial conditions” camp.
Those in the patient camp are focused on the increased uncertainty associated with Brexit and the lack of urgency to raise rates because of still-low inflation. As a result, these participants urge even greater caution and perhaps a longer period to wait and see. Kashkari was the lone representative of this camp to speak last week, but he has plenty of company and we heard from some of them previously. He said “there’s not a huge urgency to raise rates because inflation is coming up low.” I see this camp as seeing zero hikes or one hike this year. Bullard aligned himself with this camp, saying “there’s really no rush” to raise rates and that “in the aftermath of Brexit, people want to wait and see and I’m happy to go with that for now.” But that does not capture how dovish Bullard has become, and he’s really in a camp of his own. He believes it may be appropriate to have only one hike through 2018, though he has said that that hike should come this year.
The initial conditions camp—which includes George, Mester, Kaplan, and Harker—is more hawkish, focused on the proximity of the economy to the FOMC’s full employment and price stability objectives and the risks of maintaining rates too low for too long. George said “I continue to think that the current level of interest rates today is too low relative to the performance of the economy.” Harker said that “consumer price inflation continued to firm this quarter with core measures approaching the FOMC’s target of 2 percent.” Mester said “there are also risks to forestalling rate increases for too long when we are continuing to make cumulative progress on our policy goals.” Kaplan also emphasized that “rates this low, or excessive accommodation, create distortions,” so “it’s very important for us to make an effort and to be forward thinking about normalizing rates.” I see this camp as seeing one or two hikes as appropriate this year. Harker said “I anticipate that it may be appropriate for up to two additional rate hikes this year” and Lockhart said “I still can imagine circumstances in which at least one policy move could take place and possibly two…I wouldn’t rule out as many as two.” Mester and George did not mention a timetable, but we know where George stands and Mester has been in the more optimistic and somewhat more hawkish camp. But even in this camp there are many who also urge a cautious and gradual pace. Lockhart said that, “for the very near term, I see little choice but to exercise some patience and let the picture clarify.” Kaplan said “we should be looking to remove accommodation but we need to do it in a patient, gradual way.”