We’ve made a commitment to have a certain stock of purchases to be completed by June. I view the bar for not completing those purchases as being extremely high.

It is important to emphasize that we at the Federal Reserve have been expecting the economy to strengthen. We provided additional monetary policy stimulus via the asset purchase program to help ensure that the recovery regained momentum. A stronger recovery with more rapid progress toward our dual mandate objectives is what we have been seeking. This is welcome and not a reason to reverse course.

[A recent study] suggests that conditions would have been even worse in the absence of the Federal Reserve's securities purchases: The unemployment rate would have remained persistently above 10 percent, and core inflation would have fallen below zero this year. Of course, considerable uncertainty surrounds those estimates, but they nonetheless suggest that the benefits of the asset purchase programs probably have been sizeable.

The improvement in the growth outlook has been noticeable enough to tilt the case further against QE2... To my mind, it was a close call to begin with.

Bullard stated that ahead of the November FOMC meeting, the policy change had been largely priced into markets, and the financial market effects were conventional. In particular, he said, “real interest rates declined, inflation expectations rose, the dollar depreciated, and equity prices rose.” Bullard added, “These are the ‘classic’ financial market effects one might observe when the Fed eases monetary policy in ordinary times.” Bullard concluded that “quantitative easing has been an effective tool, even while the policy rate is near zero.”

Since QE2 was announced, the economic outlook has improved, Bullard noted. “The natural debate now,” he said, “is whether to complete the program, or to taper off to a somewhat lower level of asset purchases.”

Q: Is QE2 working?

A: I would say it is having effects but at what price later on? My view is it is not just about intended consequences, it is about unintended consequences.

Q: How about tapering off QE2?

A: I certainly would. I am for tapering them off. If you can do it in the right way without disrupting the markets, then yes, by June or sooner. But that precondition is a pretty tough precondition – doing it in the right way, not disrupting markets.

Q: Communication?

A: Communication, communication, communication.

Several notable forces combined to encourage the resumption of stronger growth. On the policy side, as I mentioned, the Federal Open Market Committee provided further stimulus through purchasing Treasury securities. This, plus the lagged effects of its previous measures, helped to improve financial conditions.

The entire FOMC knows the history and the ruinous fate that is meted out to countries whose central banks take to regularly monetizing government debt. Barring some unexpected shock to the economy or financial system, I think we are pushing the envelope with the current round of Treasury purchases. I would be very wary of expanding our balance sheet further; indeed, given current economic and financial conditions, it is hard for me to envision a scenario where I would not use my voting position this year to formally dissent should the FOMC recommend another tranche of monetary accommodation. And I expect I will be at the forefront of the effort to trim back our Treasury holdings and tighten policy at the earliest sign that inflationary pressures are moving beyond the commodity markets and into the general price stream. I am a veteran of the Carter administration and know how easily prices can spin out of control and how cruelly markets can exact their revenge. I would not want to relive that experience.

The Committee recognized that the provision of further monetary stimulus at this point in the business cycle is not without risks, and therefore committed to regularly review the pace and overall size of the asset-purchase program in light of incoming information and adjust the program as needed. The distinct improvement in the economic outlook since the program was initiated suggests taking that re-evaluation quite seriously. That re-evaluation will be challenging, because inflation is capable of accelerating, even if the level of economic activity has not yet returned to pre-recession trend.

You can never say never, but I cannot imagine a convincing argument for further quantitative easing after this round, given what is developing now in the economy.

While the outlook may not have improved enough yet to warrant adjusting our purchase plans in the near-term, I anticipate earnest re-evaluation as economic developments unfold in the months ahead.

While the outlook may not have improved enough yet to warrant adjusting our purchase plans in the near-term, I anticipate earnest re-evaluation as economic developments unfold in the months ahead.

The entire FOMC knows the history and the ruinous fate that is meted out to countries whose central banks take to regularly monetizing government debt. Barring some unexpected shock to the economy or financial system, I think we have reached our limit. I would be wary of further expanding our balance sheet

I wish we hadn't done [QE2], but that doesn't mean I want to stop it right now.

If the economy begins to grow more quickly and the sustainability of this recovery continues to gain traction, then the purchase program will need to be reconsidered along with other aspects of our very accommodative policy stance. We are a year and a half into a recovery, although a modest one. The aggressiveness of our accommodative policy may soon backfire on us if we don’t begin to gradually reverse course. On the other hand, if serious risks of deflation or deflationary expectations emerge, then we would need to take that into account as we adjust our policy stance.