Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think the statement is just about right. I like the current length and structure. I would not want to see a great deal more detail in it about our assessment of the economy. I think that should wait for the minutes, but I don’t think there’s anything that’s in the statement now that we should cut. The statement has evolved; and we have in practice avoided doing something formulaic in terms of the balance of risks. We do not have the same language all the time. We sometimes use forward-looking policy language and sometimes we don’t. That’s good. I think we should avoid anything formulaic and just do what’s appropriate in the given conditions. When we were on a path of raising the fed funds rate from 1 percent, and we had every expectation that we would be involved in a series of steps over time, it would have been highly artificial to avoid indicating in the statement that this was our expectation. It was important to signal it using forward-looking language. So I wouldn’t want to take forward-looking language off the table. It doesn’t seem too important now when our own expectation is for a flat path. So I think the statement is working well. I’m really amazed at how well the process of drafting the statement is working too.