apply equally to our consumer protection supervision program ; that is, we should also strive to promote consumer protection with as much efficiency, transparency, and simplicity as possible. i believe that a commitment to these principles is not only compatible with financial inclusion, but in fact helps promote it. regulatory burden can make it harder for institutions to serve their customers and communities. this is especially the case for community banks and minority depository institutions ( or mdis ), which play an important role in serving the needs of their local communities, including historically underserved populations. i ’ d also like to share some thoughts on an area to which i have devoted a good portion of my career : the importance of small business access to credit, which is a critical part of financial inclusion and a catalyst for economic growth in local communities. financial inclusion let me start with the foundation of why financial inclusion is important. in broad terms, financial inclusion means access to affordable financial products and services that meet the needs of individuals and businesses and that are delivered in a responsible and sustainable way. 3 at the federal reserve, we recognize the influence that financial inclusion has on the broader 1 / 7 bis central bankers'speeches economic performance of our country. 4 inclusion is essential to advancing the federal reserve ’ s goal of promoting maximum employment, as well as supporting the stability of the financial system. likewise, we support and share your goal of ensuring a fair and transparent marketplace for financial products and services — including credit — that can provide a pathway toward economic prosperity for all americans. overall, our economy is performing well, and unemployment is low. however, many households and communities continue to face financial challenges. 5 consider that more than two - thirds of white households own their homes as compared to less than half of african americans and hispanics. 6and consider that all important human asset : education. one - third of white adults have at least a bachelor ’ s degree as compared to one in four african americans and 17 percent of hispanics. 7 this matters because the advantages of a college degree for accumulating income and wealth are lifelong and inter - generational. 8 we likewise see evidence of financial disparities in the federal reserve ’ s survey of household economics and decisionmaking and survey of consumer finances. 9 when individuals have unequal or insufficient access to financial products and services, such as credit, they may be deprived of a chance to fund an education, finance a business, or pursue homeownership — opportunities that can provide greater financial security for

as measured by nominal interest rates. the main cross - sectional study of countries was done by cecchetti and ehrmann ( 1999 ). they noted that the decade of the 1990s, when many countries went to inflation targeting, was a good one for economic outcomes : many monetary regimes tried in this decade are likely to look good. in their formal work, these authors fit var models for twenty - three countries, nine inflation targeters and fourteen non - targeters. from these models, they deduced policymakers ’ aversion to inflation volatility. they found that inflation aversion rose in countries that adopted inflation targeting but only to the level of aversion already apparent in the policies of the non - targeting countries. at this point, there is very little difference between aversion to inflation in countries that target and countries that do not target inflation. taken together, the basic data, the time series tests, and the cross - section tests indicate that inflation targeting has seemed to succeed. inflation has dropped materially in the three countries with the longest experience with the regime, and all inflation targeting countries are still content with inflation targeting, in some cases eight to ten years after its adoption. measures of inflation persistence also have dropped. a seeming weakness of inflation targeting is in its response to unemployment, but at this time one can find little evidence that unemployment has worsened in targeting countries. at the same time, inflation targeting has been adopted in the 1990s, a good decade for economic outcomes in most countries. it is unclear how inflation targeting would look in more difficult economic circumstances such as the 1970s. is inflation targeting right for the united states? the hidden question in all this, of course, is whether the united states should go to a regime of explicit inflation targeting. i am not going to try to answer that question but will make several points. first, the question of whether the united states does or does not adopt a formal inflation targeting regime is not up to the federal reserve. the federal reserve act now requires the fed to strive for maximum employment and balanced growth, along with price stability and moderate long - term interest rates. until the congress changes these guidelines, the fed will continue to pursue these goals. second, the federal reserve is strongly committed to controlling inflation, however formally this goal is specified in the fed ’ s mandate. this can be seen from both words and deeds. countless official pronouncements and testimony affirm the importance of controlling inflation. as for actions,