I understand the concern about the fed funds rate assumption, how we interpret that, and what we ought to do. I have two suggestions. One, I still believe that it ought to be part of the practice. I’ve expressed that view before. Two, at least for internal purposes, for this next dry run it would be helpful to get that information on funds rate assumptions back in the write-up so that, as we think about how this works, we will have those data to look at and to discuss at least in the context of what it looks like and how it might shape what we’re doing. I know that Vince gave us some indication of what people actually used when they submitted it. I’d just make a suggestion that in the next go-round the information be included for internal purposes just to see how it shapes our discussion.