speeches · February 15, 2023
Regional President Speech
Loretta J. Mester · President
Returning to Price Stability:
In It to Win It
Loretta J. Mester
President and Chief Executive Officer
Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
Financial Executives International of Northeast Ohio
and
The Association for Corporate Growth Cleveland
Cleveland, OH
February 16, 2023
The remarks on the national economy and monetary policy are the same as those delivered earlier on
February 16, 2023.
1
Introduction
I thank Financial Executives International of Northeast Ohio and the Association for Corporate Growth
Cleveland for inviting me to speak this evening. It is my pleasure to welcome you to the Federal Reserve
Bank of Cleveland. As you know, the Cleveland Fed represents the Federal Reserve System’s Fourth
District, which comprises the state of Ohio and portions of Kentucky, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia.
As president of the Cleveland Fed, I like to engage with a variety of people from around the District to get
a better sense of what is happening on the ground in our economy. These insights are more timely than
the official government statistics, and I share the economic reconnaissance gathered from our business,
labor, consumer, and community contacts with my colleagues at Federal Open Market Committee
(FOMC) meetings so that it can inform the setting of national monetary policy in pursuit of our statutory
goals of maximum employment and price stability.
This evening, my topic will be the outlook for the U.S. and Ohio economy and the appropriate monetary
policy settings that will return our economy to price stability. The views I present will be my own and
not necessarily those of the Federal Reserve System or of my colleagues on the Federal Open Market
Committee.
Because the Super Bowl was played just this past Sunday, I titled my talk “In It to Win It” because the
Fed is committed to getting inflation back to our 2 percent goal. But, of course, returning the economy to
price stability is not a game: it is an imperative for sustaining healthy labor markets and our standard of
living. The very high inflation the economy has experienced for almost two years has been painful for
households and businesses, especially those with fewer resources, as they have had to cope with
increasing costs and make hard choices about where to spend their money. Organizations that offer
services to lower-income households have also been struggling with higher costs, limiting their ability to
offer aid to as many people. High inflation also imposes longer-run costs on our economy because it
distorts the decisions households and businesses make about building human capital and investing in
2
R&D, plants and equipment, and other forms of physical capital. These decisions ultimately affect the
pace of innovation, productivity growth, the potential growth rate of the economy, and improvement in
our living standards. Because of the negative costs of high inflation, the Fed is resolved and focused on
returning to price stability in a timely way: we are in it to win it.
Last year, in the wake of very high inflation, the Fed took deliberate action to remove monetary policy
accommodation. Over the course of 2022, the FOMC raised the federal funds rate, our policy rate, by
4-1/4 percentage points and began reducing the size of the Fed’s balance sheet by allowing assets to roll
off. At the meeting two weeks ago, the FOMC took another step and raised the target range of the federal
funds rate by 25 basis points to 4-1/2 to 4-3/4 percent and the balance-sheet reduction continues.
Several factors contributed to the sharp rise in inflation, which started in the spring of 2021 in the U.S.,
but has also occurred in other advanced economies around the globe. These factors include the pandemic
and how households, businesses, and monetary and fiscal policymakers responded to it, as well as
Russia’s war against Ukraine. An imbalance arose between strong demand and constrained supply, which
led to significant upward pressures on prices in an environment of accommodative monetary and fiscal
policy.
Incoming economic information shows that our monetary policy actions are having the intended effect of
slowing demand and reducing price pressures. In addition, supply chain disruptions are easing, which is
also helping to alleviate some of the imbalance between aggregate demand and aggregate supply. This is
good news, but further monetary policy action is needed to ensure that inflation is on a sustainable
downward path to 2 percent.
Economic Growth
3
Economic growth slowed considerably last year, and I expect that growth will be well under trend this
year. Real GDP grew at a below-trend pace of 1 percent last year, down from a very robust pace of about
5-3/4 percent in 2021. Growth in the final quarter of last year was almost 3 percent, but much of that was
due to firms rebuilding inventories. Abstracting from inventories, growth in real final sales was a more
modest 1-1/2 percent, suggesting some dampening in underlying momentum.
Interest-rate-sensitive sectors have been experiencing the sharpest slowdown. Residential investment
continues to decline sharply in response to higher mortgage rates. Business fixed investment and
manufacturing activity have slowed. Consumer spending, which makes up 70 percent of GDP, has held
up, reflecting the strength in household balance sheets. But it has slowed from the robust pace seen in
2021.
On the supply side of the economy, supply chain disruptions have improved but not uniformly across
sectors and products. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Global Supply Chain Pressure Index fell
appreciably during 2022, although it remains above its pre-pandemic level.1 Some of the improvement in
this index last month reflects better delivery times from China, consistent with China easing its zero-
COVID policy and reopening its economy. Our business contacts tell us that transportation bottlenecks
and delivery times have improved compared to last year but that certain products, including computer
chips and electric generators, remain difficult to source.
Labor Markets
Despite the slowdown in growth, labor market conditions remain strong, with labor demand continuing to
outpace labor supply. After some moderation over the past year, there was a sizable gain in payrolls in
1 The Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Global Supply Chain Pressure Index is available at
https://www.newyorkfed.org/research/policy/gscpi#/overview.
4
January, with the economy adding over 500 thousand jobs. The number of job openings moved down
somewhat over the past year, but there are still 1.9 openings per unemployed worker. The unemployment
rate has been running at about 3.5 percent for the past year, a 50-year low, and it actually edged down in
January. Despite these strong numbers, anecdotal reports from our business contacts suggest that
conditions are easing in the labor market, except in healthcare where significant hiring challenges remain
due to a national shortage of skilled and unskilled healthcare workers. Although they do not intend to
reduce their workforces, many of our business contacts have tempered their demand for workers and
those that are hiring say it has become easier to find the workers they need.
On the supply side, labor force participation has stabilized below its pre-pandemic level. Over time, it has
become apparent that this lower level of participation reflects structural factors such as the high level of
retirements over the pandemic, reduced immigration, changes in preferences, and the difficulty in finding
affordable childcare.
An indication that labor demand is outpacing labor supply is strong wage growth. Labor costs constitute
a significant share of a business’s expenses, especially in the service sector. The strong increase in wages
has contributed to higher inflation, yet workers’ wage gains generally have not kept up with inflation. So,
in real terms, many workers are not better off. Recent data and reports from business contacts suggest
that as the economy has slowed, wage growth has started to moderate from its peak last summer.
Nonetheless, nominal wage growth is still around 4-1/2 percent. Given current estimates of trend
productivity growth of between 1 and 1-1/2 percent, this means wage growth is still about 1 to 1-1/2
percentage points above the level consistent with price stability.
The imbalance between labor demand and supply will need to continue to shrink to alleviate wage
pressures. Since there is little reason to think that labor force participation will increase significantly in
the coming months, labor demand will need to moderate further to reduce the imbalance. I expect that
5
with the economy growing well below trend, the labor market will cool off, with slower employment
growth and a rise in the unemployment rate. But this moderation in labor demand could come mainly
from firms deciding not to add to their payrolls rather than cutting their staffs. Indeed, many contacts
have told me they plan to do all they can to retain workers through the slowdown, given how hard hiring
has been over the past couple of years. This suggests we will see less of an increase in the unemployment
rate than is typical in an economic slowdown.
Inflation
Inflation remains well above our goal of 2 percent. Recent monthly readings show inflation has eased
from its high point last summer, and short-term inflation expectations have moved down with it. In
December, the year-over-year measure of headline PCE inflation moderated to 5 percent, compared to 7
percent in June, with declining energy prices contributing to the decline in overall inflation. Underlying
inflation measures have also shown some improvement. In December, core PCE inflation was about
4-1/2 percent compared to 5 percent in June. Looking at the most recent 3-month period, core PCE
inflation is down to 3 percent. The median and trimmed-mean PCE inflation rates, which exclude
components with the most extreme movements each month, have also improved in recent months but to a
lesser extent.2
The improvement in the monthly readings in core inflation has come from the goods sector, where PCE
goods prices fell about 3 percent, annualized, over the past three months. Some of that decline reflected
an unsustainably sharp drop in used car prices. So goods inflation is likely to move up in coming months.
Shelter price inflation has not improved, but it is expected to ease later in the year as housing activity
2 The Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland produces the median and trimmed-mean CPI inflation rate and the median
PCE inflation rate. The Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas produces the trimmed-mean PCE inflation rate. The
Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland’s Center for Inflation Research produces inflation measures and analyses of
inflation and inflation expectations to inform policymakers, researchers, and the general public
(https://www.clevelandfed.org/en/our-research/center-for-inflation-research.aspx).
6
continues to weaken and the deceleration in rents in new leases passes through to the inflation measures.
Core services inflation excluding shelter has not improved. It tends to be sticky, is correlated with wage
inflation, and has a large share in the overall index, since consumers spend a larger share of their income
on services than on goods.
For much of the pre-pandemic expansion, core goods inflation was slightly negative, on average, and
falling goods prices were pulling inflation down. By the end of that expansion, inflation was nearing our
target. In January 2020, PCE inflation had reached 1.8 percent and core inflation had risen to 1.7 percent.
That reading reflected 0.75 percent deflation in core goods prices and 2.5 percent inflation in core
services prices. That is very different from today. In the current period of high inflation, which began in
the spring of 2021, core goods prices have been rising, and for much of this period until recently, inflation
in core goods has exceeded inflation in core services. To achieve our longer-run goal of 2 percent
inflation, we will need to see continued sustained disinflation in both components.
My expectation is that we will see a meaningful improvement in inflation this year and further
improvement over the following year, with inflation reaching our 2 percent goal in 2025. But my outlook
is contingent on appropriate monetary policy. Before I turn to monetary policy, let me discuss the Ohio
economy.
Ohio Economy
Ohio is the seventh largest economy in the nation in terms of real gross state product. The path of a
regional economy reflects its industrial mix and the nature of the shocks that have hit it and the broader
U.S. economy. Manufacturing, and within manufacturing, autos and auto parts, still constitute an
important part of Ohio’s economy. Indeed, Ohio is still one of the largest producers of motor vehicles
among states, and the recent investment announcements from Intel and LG Energy Solution suggest that
7
autos will remain an important sector here. But the state has become more diversified over the past 40
years.
The share of employment in manufacturing has been on a longer-term downward trend, at both the
regional and the national level. Compared to the nation, manufacturing represents a larger share of
payroll jobs in Ohio, but that differential has fallen over time.3 And Ohio’s economy has been
transitioning from one that is largely dependent on manufacturing and heavy industry to one that is
diversifying into healthcare and education. In the 1990s, manufacturing represented about 20 percent of
Ohio’s jobs and “eds and meds” represented about 12 percent. Those shares have now nearly reversed.
In the past decade, the share of jobs in manufacturing has fallen to under 13 percent and the share in “eds
and meds” has risen to nearly 17 percent. Regions that have diversified their industrial base have
generally fared better over time. And in general, over the pandemic, the economy in Ohio has performed
similarly to the national economy. Both Ohio and the U.S. experienced sharp drops in activity when the
economy shut down, and since the trough in activity in the second quarter of 2020 through the third
quarter of last year, both experienced similar annualized growth rates of between 6 and 7 percent.
As in the nation, employers in Ohio have struggled to find workers throughout the pandemic. And in
Ohio, workforce growth tends to be slower than in the nation due to slower population growth. So this
has been a very challenging period for employers. The Ohio labor market remains very tight. Ohio’s
unemployment rate was about 4-1/4 percent in December, the lowest it has been in two decades. And
there were almost one-and-a-half jobs available for every unemployed worker in Ohio, well above the
level in the pre-pandemic expansion when the labor market was also tight. The rising cost and wage
pressures experienced by businesses in Ohio have led them to raise the prices they charge to their
3 Over the past decade, the share of jobs in manufacturing was 8.6 percent for the U.S. and 12.5 percent for Ohio. In
the 1990s, the share of jobs in manufacturing was 14.8 percent for the U.S. and 19.9 percent for Ohio.
8
customers, and most say they have had little pushback in this high inflation environment. This gives me a
natural segue to discuss monetary policy.
Monetary Policy
In making its monetary policy decisions, the FOMC is always guided by its strong commitment to
achieving its statutory goals of price stability and maximum employment. The FOMC has come an
appreciable way in bringing policy from a very accommodative stance to a restrictive one, but I believe
we have more work to do. Precisely how much higher the federal funds rate will need to go and for how
long policy will need to remain restrictive will depend on how much inflation and inflation expectations
are moving down, and that will depend on how much demand is slowing, supply challenges are being
resolved, and price pressures are easing. At this juncture, the incoming data have not changed my view
that we will need to bring the fed funds rate above 5 percent and hold it there for some time to be
sufficiently restrictive to ensure that inflation is on a sustainable path back to 2 percent. Indeed, at our
meeting two weeks ago, setting aside what financial market participants expected us to do, I saw a
compelling economic case for a 50-basis-point increase, which would have brought the top of the target
range to 5 percent.
My view of appropriate policy is contingent on my economic outlook, which is informed by incoming
data, the real-time reconnaissance provided by our regional contacts, and a variety of economic models
and analyses. The FOMC likes to say that its policy decisions are data dependent, but that doesn’t mean
we react to one or two data points. Instead, I view “data dependent” as shorthand for saying that
incoming economic information informs my economic outlook and assessment of risks, which, in turn,
informs my view of appropriate monetary policy.
9
In addition to my economic outlook, my policy views are also importantly influenced by risk-
management considerations, including the risks to the economic outlook and my assessment of the costs
of continued high inflation to households, businesses, and the longer-run health of the economy.
It is welcome news to see some moderation in inflation readings since last summer, but the level of
inflation matters and it is still too high. January’s CPI inflation report showed a jump in the monthly rate
of overall inflation and no improvement in underlying inflation. The report provides a cautionary tale
against concluding too soon that inflation is on a timely and sustained path back to 2 percent.
I continue to see the risks to the inflation forecast as tilted to the upside for a number of reasons. Russia’s
continuing war in Ukraine adds uncertainty to the inflation picture, particularly for food and energy
prices. While energy prices have moved down, partly because of mild winter weather in Europe, they
could move up again, as could food prices. Indeed, in January, energy prices in the CPI rose strongly and
food prices also advanced. These items constitute a sizable share of the consumption basket for many
households, particularly those with lower incomes. They also influence short-term inflation expectations.
China is another source of risk. On the one hand, the reopening of China is helping to ease supply chain
disruptions. But China is also a major world economy and increasing demand there will put upward
pressure on commodity prices.
Several private-sector forecasters do not expect inflation to return to 2 percent until sometime next year.
According to the median in the December FOMC Summary of Economic Projections, this goal will not
be reached until 2025.4 If that comes to pass, it means that inflation will have been above 2 percent for
4 The December 2022 Summary of Economic Projections of FOMC participants is available at
https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/fomcprojtabl20221214.pdf. The FOMC will release a new set
of projections after its March meeting.
10
over 4 years, and well above 2 percent for much of that time. Even that forecast could turn out to be
optimistic. Some recent research by economists at the Cleveland Fed presents a plausible case, based on
a model and historical relationships in the data, that inflation could end up being much more persistent
than current projections, despite the actions the FOMC has taken.5 While this research has not altered my
view that there will be material improvement in inflation this year, it does inform my view that the risks
to inflation remain on the upside.
The upside risks to inflation and historical experience suggest to me that the costs of undershooting on
policy or prematurely loosening policy still outweigh the costs of overshooting. Under-tightening raises
the risk that inflation will settle in stubbornly above our goal, imposing both short-run and long-run costs
on households and businesses. It could result in longer-term inflation expectations moving higher, which
would make it much harder and more costly to return to price stability. Over-tightening also has costs,
but if inflation begins to move down faster than anticipated, we can react appropriately.
Given the risks and costs, we need to be prepared to move the federal funds rate higher if the upside risks
to inflation are realized and inflation fails to moderate as expected or if the imbalances between demand
and supply in product and labor markets persist longer than anticipated.
Summary
In summary, inflation remains too high and it is the responsibility of the FOMC to bring it down. So the
FOMC is resolute in continuing to bring monetary policy to a sufficiently restrictive stance to ensure that
inflation returns to our 2 percent goal in a timely way. Tighter financial conditions will result in growth
well below trend this year and some cooling off in labor markets, with slower employment growth and an
5 See Randal J. Verbrugge and Saeed Zaman, “Post-COVID Inflation Dynamics: Higher for Longer,” Working
Paper No. 23-06, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, January 2023. (https://doi.org/10.26509/frbc-wp-202306)
11
increase in the unemployment rate from its very low level. These developments will help to alleviate
price and wage pressures. As a result, I expect to see good progress on inflation this year.
We are operating in an uncertain environment and economic conditions can evolve in unexpected ways.
With growth well below trend, it wouldn’t take much of a negative shock to push growth into negative
territory for a time. Most of our business contacts are preparing for a mild recession. Similarly, inflation
dynamics over this expansion have been influenced in important ways by the pandemic and the war in
Ukraine, and we need to be very open to the idea that inflation can evolve differently than we expect. To
help me formulate my economic outlook and policy views over the year, I will be looking at a variety of
incoming data and collecting economic and financial information from our business, labor market, and
community contacts.
The transition back to price stability will take some time and will not be without some pain. There will be
some bumps along the way as the economy slows, but high inflation is also very painful. I do not view
the current situation as one in which there is a tradeoff between our two monetary policy goals because
returning to price stability in a timely way is the best way to ensure a healthy labor market over the longer
run. So I plan to remain diligent in setting monetary policy to return the economy to price stability and to
be judicious in balancing the risks so as to minimize the pain of the journey.
In short, I remain in it to win it.
Cite this document
APA
Loretta J. Mester (2023, February 15). Regional President Speech. Speeches, Federal Reserve. https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/regional_speeche_20230216_loretta_j_mester
BibTeX
@misc{wtfs_regional_speeche_20230216_loretta_j_mester,
author = {Loretta J. Mester},
title = {Regional President Speech},
year = {2023},
month = {Feb},
howpublished = {Speeches, Federal Reserve},
url = {https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/regional_speeche_20230216_loretta_j_mester},
note = {Retrieved via When the Fed Speaks corpus}
}