The Federal Open Market Committee voted 10-2 to keep its benchmark rate between 3.75% and 4%. Cook was joined by Cleveland Fed President Beth Hammack, both of whom “favored raising the target range for the federal funds rate by 1/4 percentage point at this meeting,” the Fed said in its statement.
The vote came with two firsts: It was Cook’s first dissent since she joined the board in 2022. And it was also the first time a Fed governor and a regional bank president had disagreed on the same side since October 1992. Then, Gov. Lawrence Lindsey and Cleveland Fed President Jerry Jordan both wanted the Fed to cut rates immediately, while Gov. John LaWare and Fed Chairman of St. Louis, Thomas Melzer, were at odds together on the other side.
Fed records show how rare this pair has become since then. In 1993, Governors Wayne Angell and Lindsey twice disagreed in favor of higher rates, but neither president joined them. When Philadelphia Fed President Edward Boehne argued alongside Angell in May, he argued in the opposite direction. LaWare was the only dissenter in December 1994, when he wanted an immediate raise.
Dissent further, but separately
But after that period, governors largely stopped expressing disagreement. Mark Olson broke ranks alone in 2005, and Michelle Bowman did the same in 2024.
Since then, governors and presidents have expressed differences at the same meeting, but on opposite sides. In October 2025, Governor Stephen Miran pushed for a deeper reduction while Kansas City Fed President Jeff Schmid opposed it. In April, Miran wanted a cut while Hammack, Minneapolis Fed President Neel Kashkari, and Dallas Fed President Lorie Logan opposed the release’s signal that cuts were coming.
“It’s not that common to have a governor and a president at odds,” said Laura Ullrich, director of North America economic research at the Indeed Hiring Lab, who worked at the Richmond Fed for years. Hammack’s vote did not surprise her, since she had heard Hammack state his views at a conference in Cleveland two weeks earlier. “Lisa Cook’s dissent was more surprising,” Ullrich said. Fortune.
“Monetary medicine”
The Fed maintained its view that “inflation remains high.”
At a news conference after the decision, Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh said the committee chose to wait and see. “What we decided to do is ask these questions, to take stock of where we are, to assess what we see out the window, to ask ourselves whether the period that is right before us is likely to provide more clarity.”
He added: “The overwhelming consensus is that what we have done in this monetary medicine is starting to work, but there are no definitive conclusions.”
“It’s a waiting game,” said Ullrich, who believes an increase is likely soon. “Since the last meeting, none of the inflation data has improved. The situation has gotten worse,” she said. “I think the probability of a hike in December is very, very high. It was already high in the market, so it will probably increase further after today’s decision.”
Consumer prices increased by 3.7% in September compared to the previous year. Before Wednesday’s decision, traders estimated the chances of a rate hike in December at 78%, according to the CME Group’s FedWatch tool.
It is difficult to understand that inflation has increased and the rate has not increased. “Ultimately, the FOMC’s vote today to keep its target federal funds rate unchanged (although widely expected) is a bit difficult to reconcile with its unconditional commitment to restoring price stability, made repeatedly over the past five months,” said Aubrey Woessner, associate economist at Indeed Hiring Lab. “Whether the public believes the Fed will reduce inflation in a timely manner is important to everyone.”
Ullrich said inflation expectations have risen, although it’s “pretty incredible” that they have remained as anchored as they have been. “If inflation expectations rise, the literature shows that inflation follows,” she said.
The decision came less than a week before the midterm elections, but that shouldn’t be taken as rhyme or reason. “There were years where they raised rates right before the midterm. There were years where they cut rates right before the midterm. There were years where they stayed flat right before the midterm,” noted Fed watcher and whisperer Ullrich. “I wouldn’t read too much into it. I know it’s very easy to read into it.”
Having worked at the Fed, she said preparation for each meeting was driven by data. “They look at a lot of data points,” she said. “Are midterms considered as one of those items? Maybe on some level, but personally I don’t give it much importance.”
The Fed also revised upwards its view of the economy, saying that activity is “developing at a sustained pace”, compared to “solid” in September. Ullrich said Indeed’s Job Openings Index turned positive year-over-year in mid-September for the first time in four years, but “we’re clearly still in a low hiring, low fire environment.”
Gn bussni
