Source
stringclasses
1 value
Date
int64
1.98k
2.01k
Text
stringlengths
2
27.1k
Token_count
int64
1
5.57k
fomc
1,977
Well, that's a possibility. Yes, Governor Gardner.
11
fomc
1,977
Gentlemen, the core of this discussion is whether or not our instructions to the Desk should be immediately released for the next 30 day of its activities. Do we need any more evidence that the policies of this [Committee] over the last 30 years have been appropriate? The last three weeks clearly indicated the impact o...
294
fomc
1,977
I would endorse that completely, unless of course, members of the Committee have changed their minds, and I doubt if that is the case. But if that should be case, we'll learn about that within a very few minutes. Mr. Coldwell.
50
fomc
1,977
Mr. Chairman, I don't have any problems with Governor Gardner's idea that we go ahead with appeal on this. But I do think it might be well for the Committee to take a look at what Governor Wallich suggested, however. If Tom's appraisal of this matter bears any relation to where we come out, we may find ourselves [with]...
100
fomc
1,977
That seems to me the most likely single course of events.
12
fomc
1,977
No, I would not say that. I think the chances are that we'll get a 30-day stay, but in case we don't, I don't see there's anything to discuss. If we don't, we have to observe the law as laid down by the Court of Appeals.
55
fomc
1,977
Mr. Chairman, I do think that there are two possibilities, as I see it, [forcing] early release. One is that the Solicitor General will not take the case, and the other is that the Supreme Court won't take the case, which they often do not.
56
fomc
1,977
No, but we won't know that immediately.
9
fomc
1,977
No, but it would be--apparently they do it within the 30-day period. Is that correct, Tom?
25
fomc
1,977
To the best of my knowledge.
7
fomc
1,977
So it would mean that, sometime between December 1 and January 1, we might have another possible report date, and it seems to me that, just as a matter of defensive strategy, we might want to eliminate reference to a funds rate range in the current directive.
55
fomc
1,977
We should examine, I think, how we could live under this. What are the techniques by which we could do this?
25
fomc
1,977
I think we need a staff study--
8
fomc
1,977
--recommend that we do--
6
fomc
1,977
--and it might also be desirable to change this one. Since this one might be--
18
fomc
1,977
Well, it might be, and there are other defensive devices, but I think what we ought to decide at this meeting is, I think we ought to accept--that's my strong recommendation to the Committee--what Tom O'Connell has suggested. And then depending on how events unfold, we ought to discuss--that is, if they go favorably, w...
127
fomc
1,977
Second.
2
fomc
1,977
Shouldn't there be some contingency planning in the interim here as to--?
15
fomc
1,977
Yes, but let's not do it at this table.
11
fomc
1,977
Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that there are two parts here. I'm emphatically supportive of what Steve has said on the procedure on the legal side. I think we have an obligation to ourselves, if to no one else, in that regard. But I'm sensitive to Henry's point, too. But it seems to me this is a proper [project], of how...
111
fomc
1,977
I'm a little concerned about that. I'm a little concerned about that. Changing the rules of the game--
21
fomc
1,977
No, I don't mean that, Mr. Chairman. What I mean is, the selection of a money market directive versus a monetary aggregates directive to me has some significance here with reference to this point of release on December 1. Whether we determine a midpoint in the directive or just state a range has significance, if we're ...
89
fomc
1,977
Well, I do think that staying within our rules and avoiding excessive specificity would certainly be wise.
19
fomc
1,977
That's what I mean.
5
fomc
1,977
I take it that was what you had in mind.
11
fomc
1,977
Yes.
2
fomc
1,977
And I think that is certainly a very reasonable and wise precaution.
13
fomc
1,977
But I would let that appear in our discussion of the directive today rather than having it necessarily done as part of the discussion as to whether we appeal or not.
32
fomc
1,977
I think, Bob, even if you had the monetary aggregates formulation, that it would still specify the funds rate range.
24
fomc
1,977
Oh, it will--a range.
8
fomc
1,977
What you could very well do is--now this would be some change in procedure. You could instruct the Manager--the last phrase of the directive could read, "The operational objective for the federal funds rate shall be modified in an orderly fashion from the prevailing rate of about 6-1/2 per cent."
63
fomc
1,977
Sure.
2
fomc
1,977
I think that's quite possible.
6
fomc
1,977
And there could be, you know, the Manager has--
12
fomc
1,977
That's what I have in mind, Chuck, exactly.
11
fomc
1,977
Well, that isn't the way it's stated. Now it has a range--
15
fomc
1,977
You mean omit the range.
6
fomc
1,977
No.
2
fomc
1,977
Well, omit the funds rate range, yes.
10
fomc
1,977
Or you could omit the funds range.
8
fomc
1,977
[Unintelligible.]
6
fomc
1,977
Yes, you could, approximately.
7
fomc
1,977
The market has a range in mind that, you know, we've been on a 1/2 percent range of late, and they'll assume that that continues.
32
fomc
1,977
Gentlemen, I don't think we ought to do that. Or, if we do it, let's do it only after very thorough reflection. I don't like playing games with the law. Now, I think we ought to stay within our procedure. I think we ought to avoid as much specificity as we can, such as defining the midpoints, etcetera, the thought that...
169
fomc
1,977
Mr. Chairman, if we [chose not to pursue] an appeal to the Supreme Court, but then immediately responded to this mandate by that slight change in our directive, it seems to me we wouldn't be playing games with the law. We would be--
52
fomc
1,977
If I were a congressman, I would whip you over the coals on the basis of such evidence.
22
fomc
1,977
I don't think you would call that a slight change in the directive, Henry. I think that is a very major change.
25
fomc
1,977
But this is a very reasonable thing to do. We respond to the court without going to a last ditch fight, so we are cooperative, and we do what we would probably have to do under the new mandate, namely, write the directive that doesn't give insiders a special advantage.
56
fomc
1,977
There is another thought that I have, but I'm not ready to put it forward, and that is, I want to explore the precise, well [unintelligible] explore the implications, and that is, we could instead of issuing a directive to the New York Desk, we could make a suggestion to the New York Desk. And in actual practice, it is...
120
fomc
1,977
I'm not really concerned about--this is a 15-day period we've got. Well, it's going to be 15 days from this event before this directive will be released, if we lose. I don't think that that is a terrible state of affairs. But what I'm concerned about is that, on the first of December, we have contingency plans, [and] t...
117
fomc
1,977
No, that was not my suggestion. My suggestion was first a negative one, that we not try to decide at this table this morning. Second, that contingency plans get under way immediately, and that we communicate with one another.
46
fomc
1,977
That's fine, Mr. Chairman, but with the one exception that you are going to write a directive out of today's meeting.
25
fomc
1,977
Today's meeting.
3
fomc
1,977
That's the one that would have to be released if we lost everything.
14
fomc
1,977
All right. I say, number one, that we ought to proceed in a normal fashion but be aware, fully aware, of Mr. Mayo's word of warning.
34
fomc
1,977
But I think, Mr. Chairman, that everyone's right that, since it will be 15 days, that this can't have much market effect. That is, whatever formulation that we have, what I was thinking of more, I must admit, is that we're going to lose this. Now I hate to be that negative, but I think there's a high probability that w...
175
fomc
1,977
Chuck, wouldn't the market, wouldn't observers generally very quickly note the fact that we had changed the content of the directive, and [so] we might well be subject to an accusation of deviousness--we have changed our procedures so as not to disclose as much as we had probably decided internally. I can see a bad rea...
69
fomc
1,977
Well, I think you may be right. But on the other hand, I think the Committee has the freedom to change its directive.
27
fomc
1,977
It seems to me it has. We've changed it many times.
13
fomc
1,977
And if you say, you know, if they were expecting the aggregates within a particular range, and you're starting off on a funds rate, and the Manager ought to shade--moving above that rate or below that rate depending on how those aggregates come up--well, that's not too harmful.
58
fomc
1,977
Well, I think what is being suggested here is very dangerous. We could be inviting a condemnation by members of the Congress, and some of them are very quick to jump. And worse than that, we could be inviting condemnation by the court, and that's far more serious than condemnation by Henry Reuss or another such charact...
65
fomc
1,977
Mr. Chairman, let me make my point a little clearer here. I really don't subscribe to the idea of getting rid of the ranges. I think that would cause great attention right away. But we have used subtleties of words in widening of ranges in a statement of asymmetrical midpoints and zones of indifference so many times, I...
178
fomc
1,977
Perhaps in the interest of speeding this--now my inclination is very similar to yours in changing the directive. It seems to me, in any event, the kind of subtleties that Mr. Mayo is talking about, we can only determine in the light of what substantive decision we make here today--
60
fomc
1,977
Right.
2
fomc
1,977
--and I propose that this be deferred until we arrive at our decision and look and see how we want to word the directive.
26
fomc
1,977
Well, I think this more basic [than] that. I'm surprised to hear that we seem to be so married to this particular directive that, if circumstances change entirely, namely, we tip off the market where previously we had relied on not tipping them off, we are compelled to continue doing just what we did. It seems to me, w...
101
fomc
1,977
But the particular circumstance here is a decision by the Court of Appeals, and I don't think we ought to put ourselves in the position of being charged [with] circumventing the law and playing games with the law. I can't think of anything that could be more damaging to our future.
57
fomc
1,977
Mr. Chairman, may I ask Tom a very firm question on this? What is the court's attitude with respect to the spirit and the letter of this question? Because I think that's pertinent to this issue here.
43
fomc
1,977
The court gave, I think, a creditable review of the historical import [of] the Freedom of Information Act, President Eastburn, [and] found that the Committee's position--that the exemption 5 language covered the document in question here--to be without merit. It cast aside our position that the legislative history indi...
204
fomc
1,977
How strictly would the court hold us to sticking to our present procedures?
14
fomc
1,977
That issue wasn't in any sense either expressly or implicitly addressed in this opinion. My judgment is, the implicit change as suggested by President Mayo, that is, that the Committee's use of language to reflect its actions taken--somewhat changing the previous format of that language--would not contravene any sense ...
88
fomc
1,977
All right, thank you. Mr. Kimbrel, we haven't heard from you, and then we'll hear from Mr. Willes, and then Mr. Roos.
35
fomc
1,977
Mr. Chairman, I would very strongly also follow the recommendations of Mr. O'Connell. It seems to me that we might very well anticipate many, many things that can come along, but I rather think that it would be wise to take these in a logical order; and to attempt this, we still are able to get together to discuss thes...
102
fomc
1,977
All right, thank you, Mr. Kimbrel. Mr. Willes now, please.
20
fomc
1,977
Mr. Chairman, when this whole business started I was a very strong supporter of the System point of view. But experiences of the last couple of years, especially as I see what uncertainty does to the way people make decisions, kind of makes me wonder if there's anybody besides me who would like to reconsider our basic ...
166
fomc
1,977
Well, we'll have a show of hands. Is Mr. Willes out in left field or not? Those who think he is will raise their hands.
31
fomc
1,977
He's moving in that direction.
6
fomc
1,977
He's left of center field. He's still in the ball park, let me put it that way.
20
fomc
1,977
More seriously, how many would support Mr. Willes's position.
14
fomc
1,977
Well, with modifications in the directive.
8
fomc
1,977
I think there is a directive that we could put out--
12
fomc
1,977
How many would support Mr. Willes's position? Well, it's not a majority, so we'll put that aside without further discussion. Now, Mr. Roos, you--
36
fomc
1,977
Mr. Chairman, I agree totally with the position that you've stated, appealing it, and doing everything we can with Congress. But in considering contingencies, is it not possible for us to review, in line with what Mark Willes says, whether our strategy should be based automatically on an assumption that we're doing the...
197
fomc
1,977
Well, we could discuss that at length. I think your suggestion is one--I see no reason why we shouldn't follow it up, but I think that is only a small part of the story, and in my universe, the less important part. But I see no reason why your suggestion shouldn't be followed up by the staff in the course of our planni...
93
fomc
1,977
Mr. Chairman, along the lines of what Mr. Mayo suggested a while ago, I would think as a practical modus operandi in the interim that, when in doubt, we would tend to lean more towards an aggregates directive than a money market directive. For example, in today's meeting, I think a money market directive is appropriate...
186
fomc
1,977
Yes. I understand your first. The second troubles me, not because I have any intellectual difficulty with it, but rather because I don't think we ought to change our procedure without thorough discussion, and I doubt that we'll be ready to--
47
fomc
1,977
I didn't mean to suggest that we do it now. I just mean over the future. I think it does strengthen the argument.
26
fomc
1,977
Well, even your first point bothers me, Bob, because if you change to a money market directive because you have a lack of confidence in what the short-run aggregates numbers are telling us, and then you say well, since this court decision, we'd better go back to the aggregates directive, you really are going against so...
76
fomc
1,977
Gentlemen, you know, really, let's make the least favorable assumption, namely, that we have to issue a directive on December 1. We have 15 days, which is something quite different from issuing the directive immediately. If not, it's not a clean case. That's the least fortunate assumption, but it's not a maximum misfor...
176
fomc
1,977
Mr. Chairman, a question to Mr. O'Connell. I, of course read the court's statement strictly as a layman, but it seems to me they have said, if you want relief, it must be through the legislative channel. I found no reference there to the appeal process. They apparently felt they were rendering a final judgment on an in...
99
fomc
1,977
Well, why not follow both routes, which is the present plan suggested by Mr. O'Connell?
21
fomc
1,977
Well, why does not that [suggestion by the court] open to us an avenue of request to [the court] and give us adequate time to pursue the legislative process as compared with the time which apparently is built into the legal proceedings, if we choose to go through the legal appeal process and question their legal judgme...
65
fomc
1,977
President Baughman, the language in the Court of Appeals, I think, should be read much like in a parental circumstance, where mother says, "Ask your father." It doesn't necessarily mean that mother anticipates father's going to give any different answer or relief, but it's a way of mother being finished with the proble...
220
fomc
1,977
But it is a foregone conclusion that they will blindly follow rules and not consider other things.
19
fomc
1,977
No sir. Nor is their opinion to be read as a statement on their part that they know that they were absolutely right and that we won't pursue a petition to the Supreme Court, as I think we should.
42
fomc
1,977
All right, Mr. Baughman. Mr. Guffey, we haven't heard from you yet.
22
fomc
1,977
Yes, Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that we have really only one issue that we should decide here this morning, and it's one that Tom has presented--that is, whether we appeal or not. And to pick up on what Steve Gardner's already very well stated, I think we have an obligation to do it. There isn't, I think, anything th...
360
fomc
1,977
Well, I think that's a very, very reasonable suggestion. Any other positions you may have? Very well, Mr. Partee, your committee's charged with the responsibility promptly. Thank you very much, Mr. Guffey. Mr. Morris now, please.
54
fomc
1,977
Mr. Chairman, I just want to say I support your position entirely. I'm very much concerned about changing the directive [in a way] that would eliminate the funds range, because this would require that this Committee no longer have an interest rate policy, that we have given the Manager carte blanche to move rates as he...
132
fomc
1,977
Well, I agree with you. As a matter of fact, it can go into the opposite direction [of] what we intended to do. We'll have to see. Offhand, I can't think of a solution.
44