November 16, 1993 FOMC Minutes

FOMC minutes

The members generally agreed that their reservations about releasing the transcripts could be mitigated through appropriate safeguards such as withholding particularly sensitive materials and providing for a considerable lapse of time after Committee meetings. They noted in this connection that, while there was no legal requirement to prepare transcripts, the substance of existing transcripts needed to be preserved in accordance with the Federal Records Act. With regard to the manner in which the information might be made public, the Committee considered several alternatives including making available the unedited transcripts themselves, or lightly edited versions of the transcripts, or Memoranda of Discussion comparable to those prepared for meetings prior to late March 1976. The members expressed varying preferences among these alternatives. Some proposed that marginal notations be included with raw or edited transcripts to provide staff explanations or interpretations of unclear or evidently mistranscribed comments. It was understood that preparation of edited transcripts and especially Memoranda of Discussion would require a considerable amount of time and effort before they would be ready for public release. A majority favored the release of lightly edited transcripts that would retain all substantive comments but would allow for grammatical corrections, the smoothing of some sentences to facilitate the understanding, and the correction of obvious transcription errors. The editing would be patterned after that done for Congressional hearings; importantly, no changes would be made in the substance or the intent of the speakers. Prior to release to the public, particularly sensitive materials would be redacted in accordance with the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. The Committee agreed that the FOMC Secretariat should be given responsibility for the editing process and that the Committee itself would not undertake to review these transcripts. It was noted in this respect that many former members of the Committee were no longer available to review their comments and that in any event the passage of time would make it impossible for members to recall precisely what they had said or to verify many of their comments. Accordingly, the edited transcripts could not be regarded as official records of the Committee.

With respect to the interval between a meeting and release of a lightly edited transcript, all of the Committee members were concerned that the absence of a substantial lag would seriously harm the Committee's ongoing deliberative process. Many also commented that the absence of a substantial lag would be unfair to meeting participants who had been unaware that their remarks would be released and were unable to review the transcripts for accuracy. Various members argued for lags that ranged from 3 years to 10 years or more, but a majority felt that a 5-year lag was necessary in order to prevent harm to the Committee's ongoing deliberations. The other members indicated that a 5-year lag was acceptable because it represented a reasonable balance among the various considerations.

At the conclusion of this discussion, the members agreed unanimously to authorize the preparation of lightly edited transcripts of past meetings and available telephone conferences since late March 1976 and to release such transcripts to the public five years after the meetings, subject to the redaction of especially sensitive materials as authorized by the Freedom of Information Act. It was understood that the transcripts for the meetings held during 1988 would be edited on a priority basis and released as soon as possible. Providing copies of unedited transcripts for all past meetings and available conference calls to the Chairman or staff of the House Banking Committee in response to a request was not approved by the Committee.

The members reviewed various options for the release of information about the Committee's deliberations at future meetings. These options included continuing the preparation of the minutes in their current form, which members regarded as providing a complete account of the substance of the Committee's deliberations. Some urged that consideration be given to supplementing the minutes with the prompt release after each meeting of information about Committee decisions. Among other options considered were an expanded version of the current minutes, and the release after an appropriate lag of a lightly edited transcript or a Memorandum of Discussion for each meeting. The members concluded that the complexity of the issues reflected in these alternatives warranted further review by the Committee and accordingly a decision was deferred. It was agreed that the Committee would continue its discussion of these issues at a special meeting during December.