By stating a specific amount and a timetable for LSAPs upfront, the FOMC appeared to commit itself to a future course of action. This commitment was softened somewhat by the use of the phrase “up to” before the specified purchase amounts. However, market participants generally indicated that they expected the full amounts to be purchased, and in the later stages of the programs the FOMC made it clear that close to the full amounts would be purchased. Policymakers often prefer not to make strong commitments on future policies because there is always a chance that future economic conditions will call for a different policy stance than expected. Policymakers may want to assess the benefits of this element of commitment relative to an approach that instead allows greater responsiveness to economic and financial conditions. Bullard (2009) lays out the theoretical case for a policy rule for LSAPs analogous to conventional policy rules for interest rates, but he shows that the practical issues in designing such a rule are substantial, particularly in light of the limited historical experience of economies operating near the zero bound on nominal interest rates. Clearly, study of both the theoretical and empirical issues raised by LSAPs would be helpful in order to assess whether they can be employed even more effectively in the future.