Welcome. Today to lower the target for the federal funds rate by a quarter of a percentage point to arrange 2 to 2. 25 . The outlook remains favorable, and this action is designed to support that outlook. It is intended to ensure against weak globalks from growth to help offset the effects of these factors currently on the economy. And to promote a faster return our 2 objective. All of these will support achievement of the overarching goal, to sustain the expansion with a strong job market and inflation close to our objective for the benefit of the american people. People. We also decided to conclude the runoff of our securities portfolio in august rather than in september as previously planned. And i will discuss the thinking behind the reduction in turn to the pot forward. As the year began, both the economy and Monetary Policy were in a good place. The Unemployment Rate was below 4 in a are interestrate target was that the low ends of neutral. Over the first half of the year, the economy grew at healthy pace. And it pushed on appointment to near a halfcentury low. 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 struggle to find work are now getting opportunities to add new and better chapters to their lives. This underscores the perfect of sustaining expansion. To the course of the year, weak Global Growth trade policy uncertainty in muted inflation have prompted to adjust the assessment of the appropriate path of Interest Rates. The committee moved from expected rate increases this year to a patient stance of about any changes and then to todays actions. The median conten committee abot appointment has also declined issue. Reinforcing the case for somewhat lower path for policy rate. These changes in the anticipated path of Interest Rates have eased financial conditions and supported the economy. At our june meeting, Many Committee participants saw the case for lowing had strengthened. But the committee wanted to get a better sense of the overall direction of events. Since then, weve seen positive and negative development. Job growth was strong in june and looking through monthtomonth fluctuations, the data point to continue strength. We expect job growth to be slower than lester but above required to hold on appointment restudied. Gdp growth in the Second Quarter came in close to expectations. Consumption supported by rising incomes and high housel confidence is the main engine driving the economy forward. But manufacturing output has declined for two consecutive quarters in business following the Second Quarter. Foreign growth has disappointed particularly manufacturing and notably in the euro area and china. In response to the weakness any pigs around the world are increasing policy accommodation are contemplating doing so. After simmering early in the year, trade policy tension nearly boiled over in may and june but now appear to return to a simmer. Look into this variability, or business context tell us the ongoing uncertainty is making some companies were cautious about the capital spending. The domestic inflation shortfall has continued. Core inflation which excludes food and Energy Prices and a better gauge of future developments and total inflation has run at 1. 6 over the past 12 months. We continue to expect the inflation will return over time into percent. But domestic completion of pressures remain muted and goebel disinflation pressures persist. Wages are rising another the pace that would put much pressure on inflation. We are mindful that inflations returned to 2 before they are delayed and continued below target inflation could lead to worrisome and difficult to reverse downward slide and longterm expectation. Taking all of the on board, the Committee Still sees a favorable baseline outlook. Over the year, incoming information on Global Growth, trade policy uncertainty and inflation have led the community to gradually lower assessments of the path the policy interestrate that would best support outlook. Today, we judge those doctors want the policy adjustment i described. As the committee contemplates the future path of the target range to the federal funds rate, it will continue to moderate implications of incoming information for the Economic Outlook and will act as appropriate to sustain the 2 objective. Thank you, im happy to take your questions. Hi and with the new york times. To your statement here, the question is, is there any reason to believe that a 25 basis point cut will be sufficient to expediently return inflation for target and if not, what are you going to be looking at to be giving to you that you need to cover. What is the hurdle . I think you have to look at, not just the 25 basis point cut, but the Committee Actions over the course of the year. As i noted in my opening statement, we started off expecting some rate increases, we moved to patient setting for a few months and now we moved here. What youve seen over the course of your is that we move to a more accommodative policy, the economy has performed just about as expected with that gradually increasing support. And i would not take credit for all of that but i think increasing policy ordinance has kept the economy on track in the outlook favorable. In terms of the rest of your questions, the committee is thinking of this as a way of adjusting policy to a more accommodative stance to further the three objectives that i mentioned. To ensure the Downside Risks to provide support to the economy that those factors are pushing down on Economic Growth into support inflation. We think itll serve all the schools but again we think it over centrally in the policy. Michael from Bloomberg Television and radio. Theres a perception that perhaps the fed is something of a hammer in search of a nail because the latest Consumer Spending reports as you suggested, dont show any kind of demand problem in the u. S. And when you look at mortgage rates, auto lending rates, they will come down and wondering exactly what problem lower capital cost will solve . You are absolutely right, the performance of the economy has been reasonably good, the position of the economy is as close to our objectives as it is been in a long time. And the outlook is also good. What we have been monitoring since beginning of the year is Downside Risk to the outlook from weakening Global Growth and we see that everywhere, and now particularly in the european and china, and addition we see trade policy development which at times have been disruptive and less so, an also inflation many below target. So we see those as threats to what is a favorable outlook and we see this action designed to support them and keep the outlook favorable. Frankly it is a continuation of what we have been doing all year to provide more support against those very same risks. How does cutting Interest Rates lower, how does cutting Interest Rates keep that going to the cost of capital does not seem to be the issue . I really think it does and i think the evidence tells us that opposing the support, support confidence and Economic Activity, household and Business Confidence to channels that we understand. We will Lower Borrowing costs, and it will work. I think you see it since we noted that situation in june. Use all financial conditions move up and i want to credit for the whole recovery but you see confidence in june and he sought Economic Activity unhealthy basis, it seems to work through confidence channels as well as mechanical channels that you are talking about. Hi heather long from the washington post. You always say the fed is data dependent and much of the data that we have seen since the june meeting has surprise to the upside or has been in line with expectations. Can you give us a sense of how that better than expected data impacted the f1c inking and if we keep seeing the surprises, does that change or involve f1c thinking Going Forward . We course do what we do at every meeting, as i noted, we do a deep dive into u. S. Economic activity and goebel activity, and certainly carefully went through u. S. Economic activity which is been some positive and some negative, but overall it is shown resilient during a period. But again, the issue is more of the Downside Risks and triple inflation and were trying to addresses. So, in addition, Going Forward i would say, we are going to be monitoring those same things. We will be monitoring evolution of trade uncertainties, Global Growth and low inflation and we will also and course watch the u. S. Economy. I mentioned it shown resilient here to those issues and will put all of that together and thats how we will think about policy Going Forward. I just want to follow up on that. Would you say you guys have gotten into a new regime, this is sort of been an insurance cut and i data dependent cut, are we now more in the realm of watching headlines of trade talks and we are watching Unemployment Rate and inflation numbers, how do we know what youre going to do next and why in the new region . Three reasons for what we did, to ensure Downside Risks from trade tension. That is innocent Risk Management point in a bit of insurance. But we also feel like week Global Growth intentions are having an effect on the u. S. Economy. You see on Second Quarter, you seek weak investment and weak manufacturing. In support there. And also support 2 . But theres definitely insurance aspect of it. Trade is unusual, the thing is, there is not a lot of experience in responding to Global Change tensions. It is something that we have not faced before and were learning by doing. It is not exactly the same as watching Global Growth where you see growth weakening, Central Banks and government responding in growth strengthening and Business Cycle, with trade tensions which do seem to be having a significant effect on Market Conditions and on the economy, they evil in a different way. And we have to follow them. I want to be clear, we play no role whatsoever in assessing or evaluating trade policies other than as trade policy uncertainty has an effect on the u. S. Economy in the short and mediumterm. We are not any way criticizing tray pulsing. That is our job. Thank you. Nick with the wall street journal. Chair powell you and your colleagues have offered three reasons to cut rates, and lower neutral rate to make pulsing tighter than amp is faded, the global slowdown, the darker risk picture from the trade tensions and the desire to recenter inflation expectations. I wonder which of those factors ways most heavily and more portly, is the court appoint cut going to address any one of those . Actually think different people have different weightings the my experience. As you mentioned, lower our star trades, soda and i would actually add lower natural rates of an appointment has moved on. All of which point to more accommodation. Again, i dont think youre asking about a quarter point is the right question. You have to look over the course of the year into the committee moving away from rate increases to a neutral posture to now arica. We have been providing, that affects the forward rate path and financial conditions which affect the economy. Youve seen an economy which is performed pretty well, growth in the first half of this year is about the same as it was in all of 18. And actually a little better than a forecast for growth in 2019. I think it away, that is molly under Monetary Policy working. Again i would not look at the 25 basis point cut a three question pre inmate it seemed as if youre setting higher bar. There would need to be a deterioration in outlook. In june he seem to suggest that it did not prove there would be a rate cut. Where is upper, there is some confusion about how the committee is responding. As we noted, we noted at the bottom of the statement, the language says how we are thank you. As we are contemplating the future path of the target range, the rates, we will maintain and monitor the implications of incoming information and talked about that language prayed all i can tell you is, we will be looking at week Global Growth, and carefully to see. You learn every cycle, you learn about these things. So we will see whether growth is picking up or bottoming out. We will see the picture. Well also see entree, we will see, weve learned a lot on the cycle and we will continue to learn more. In addition, the u. S. Economy itself, the performance will enter into that. I would love to be more precise but would trade it is a factor that we have to suss and anyway, those are the things we will be looking at in making our decisions Going Forward. Edward, fox business network. A rate hike last december was seen by some economists in they said james was a step too far. Now the feds have waited about seven months for rate cut, you said you are concerned about Downside Risk, could some of the weakness with the fixed investment in the sluggish side and the business side b because the fed waited so long. I want to get your thoughts on that. And talk about why you think this nudge is the right level . We dont hear that from businesses. They dont come in and say we are not investing because the federal funds rate is too high. Ive not heard that from a business. What you hear, demand is weak for the products, you see manufacturing being weak all over the world and Business Investment is weak. I would not lay all of the at the door of trade talks, i think there is a Global Business cycle happening with manufacturing and investment. That has been definitely a bigger factor and certainly what we expected late last prayed Global Growth started to slow down in the middle of last year but that has gone on to greater trade policy is also been more elevated than we anticipated. In terms ass we believe this is the right move for today. And we think it will serve this that i mentioned. And i birdied gone over how we think about Going Forward. You called it a midcycle adjustment to policy and what should we take this to me and what message do we need to send with this mood today about future moves . The steps of that, that refers back to other times when the f moc has cut rates in the middle of a cycle, im contrasting it with the beginning of a lengthy cutting cycle. That is not what were seeing now, that is our perspective now or outlook. Are there any under which you would decide to pause one interestrate cut on todays interestrate cut and not go ahead with further monetary at this stage or are you predicting that that once you have embarked on this you will have to at least move by one not Going Forward. Our policy is, it will depend on the implications of incoming data for the Economic Outlook as well as evolving risk for the outlook. So we are going to be not under monitoring applications of incoming information for the outlook and is a mention, so that is where i would lead with that. Hi, victoria with politico. That would be a bait and switch because the fed calls for a private sector system. On the first, i would say i view the level of Capital Requirement being about riper go i agree with that. The idea you were talking about is one that the vice chair has talked about under consideration with the idea of being in a sense we have high Capital Requirements doubling with the surcharge that the largest banks have with Capital Requirements. In effect already put in place those buffers. Conceptually, not saying its the same thing. But our system doesnt rely on our ability to trigger the countercyclical tool. Always on high Capital Requirements thats the good thing to do. But the idea to put into place what other jurisdictions have done and it is worth considering that the one point is if there is a downturn this is just something thats under consideration. With the Payment System, this is something that in terms of realtime payments available theres really no other reserve system that the banks convene all the stakeholders to talk about how we can move forward with consumer groups and technology companies. And to work on a project for several years. One of the things that came out of that was a recommendation the fed should have 24 7 365 Settlement System to solve that problem. And should we do this . We have quite a lot of comments overwhelmingly favorable and i would point out in the Payment System the fed operates along side private sector operators like ach so that would be unusual how weve done things in the past. We have not made a decision on this. But it is something we are looking at carefully they do expect conversation on. Im trying to parse what you are saying. On the one hand policy will eas