The following content is from Nick Timiraos, a renowned Wall Street Journal reporter often referred to as the "Fed's mouthpiece," originally titled: "Fed's October Rate Decision Fueled Pushback Over Possible December Cut." —– According to the minutes of the Federal Reserve's October meeting released Wednesday afternoon local time, policymakers are increasingly divided on whether to cut interest rates next month, leading to a growing number of officials—and possibly a slim majority—reserving their opinions on a December rate cut. The meeting minutes, which were customarily delayed by three weeks, show that "participants expressed very different views on what policy decisions would be most appropriate at the December meeting." Last month, the Federal Reserve voted 10-2 to cut interest rates by 25 basis points, lowering the interest rate range to 3.75%-4%. However, the minutes revealed that several officials—likely regional Fed presidents who participated in the rate decision meeting but did not have voting rights—opposed the decision. Furthermore, some of the other officials who supported the rate cut indicated that they could have accepted keeping rates unchanged. The minutes reveal a rare level of division in recent years: the committee is deeply divided on its next steps. The minutes indicate that "many" officials believed there was insufficient justification for a December rate cut—a number exceeding the "few" officials who thought a cut was "likely appropriate." However, the minutes also indicated that most officials believed further interest rate cuts were still necessary after the December meeting. The Federal Reserve’s interest rate decision committee consists of seven governors appointed by the president and five voting members who rotate among the twelve regional Fed presidents. All members participate in the discussions. The disagreement revealed in the meeting minutes—the failure to distinguish between participants with and without voting rights—had already begun to emerge before the minutes were released. When policymakers decided to cut interest rates by 25 basis points in September, 10 out of 19 officials (a slight majority) included further rate cuts in their forecasts for October and December. However, this also meant that a significant minority opposed further rate cuts, citing improved labor markets or increasing inflationary pressures; some even supported a second rate cut in October. The recent end of the government shutdown exacerbated this divide, forcing a delay in the jobs and inflation reports that were supposed to help bridge the dispute over short-term interest rate decisions. Richmond Fed President Barkin admitted in an interview on Tuesday, "Without compelling data, it's difficult to reach a consensus among those with differing opinions." Because "no new circumstances have emerged that could foster consensus," he added, "it may need to be resolved through debate, and perhaps that's the approach we'll take." Investors who had previously considered a rate cut at the December 9-10 meeting a foregone conclusion are now beginning to believe the outcome is uncertain. Following the Labor Department's announcement on Wednesday that the October jobs data, originally scheduled for release on November 7, would be postponed until after the Federal Reserve meeting, the market's implied probability of a rate cut has plummeted to approximately 33%. Investors seem to believe that the lack of new jobs data that could reveal signs of economic weakness will reduce officials' willingness to support a December rate cut. Last month, two Federal Reserve officials voted against a rate cut for opposing reasons: Governor Milan advocated for a larger 50-basis-point cut, while Kansas City Fed President Schmid argued that the reasons for a rate cut were insufficient. The minutes emphasized that whatever decision the Federal Reserve makes in December, it will likely face at least three dissenting votes—three governors appointed by President Trump may oppose keeping interest rates unchanged, and at least three regional Fed presidents may oppose cutting rates. Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell faces a near-impossible task: bridging divisions and building consensus. Evercore ISI analyst Krishna Guha notes, "Unless luck strikes and the data miraculously points in the right direction, he will have to choose the lesser of two evils." Despite criticism that the Federal Reserve's consensus-seeking culture fosters "groupthink," Governor Waller made it clear on Monday that next month will be very different: "Be prepared, you may witness the least 'non-groupthink' phenomenon in the history of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC)." At the press conference following last month's meeting, Powell proactively mentioned that a December rate cut was not a certainty. He emphasized in an unusually frank tone: "Far from it," and stated that "more and more members now believe that we should at least hold off on action and wait for the next meeting to discuss it again." The state of the labor market is at the heart of these disagreements. Currently, companies are neither hiring on a large scale nor laying off workers extensively. Some policymakers are concerned that weak economic demand will lead businesses to reduce their workforce. Waller noted on Monday that more companies are "starting to discuss layoffs." This group of officials is relatively less concerned about inflation, believing that an economic downturn will limit businesses' room for price increases. They worry that overemphasizing the risk of persistent inflation could cause the economy to slip into recession unnoticed. Another group of officials believes the economy will continue to grow moderately and is concerned that inflation, which has been above the Fed's 2% target for four consecutive years, could persist for another two years due to tariff-related price increases. These officials are wary that businesses, emboldened by their success in passing on costs after the pandemic, could keep inflation at its current level of slightly below 3%, making it difficult to fall back to the 2% policy target. It is noteworthy that this camp is expanding. In addition to Schmidt, it includes the other three regional Fed presidents who have voting rights on monetary policy this year, as well as Fed Governor Barr.The following content is from Nick Timiraos, a renowned Wall Street Journal reporter often referred to as the "Fed's mouthpiece," originally titled: "Fed's October Rate Decision Fueled Pushback Over Possible December Cut." —– According to the minutes of the Federal Reserve's October meeting released Wednesday afternoon local time, policymakers are increasingly divided on whether to cut interest rates next month, leading to a growing number of officials—and possibly a slim majority—reserving their opinions on a December rate cut. The meeting minutes, which were customarily delayed by three weeks, show that "participants expressed very different views on what policy decisions would be most appropriate at the December meeting." Last month, the Federal Reserve voted 10-2 to cut interest rates by 25 basis points, lowering the interest rate range to 3.75%-4%. However, the minutes revealed that several officials—likely regional Fed presidents who participated in the rate decision meeting but did not have voting rights—opposed the decision. Furthermore, some of the other officials who supported the rate cut indicated that they could have accepted keeping rates unchanged. The minutes reveal a rare level of division in recent years: the committee is deeply divided on its next steps. The minutes indicate that "many" officials believed there was insufficient justification for a December rate cut—a number exceeding the "few" officials who thought a cut was "likely appropriate." However, the minutes also indicated that most officials believed further interest rate cuts were still necessary after the December meeting. The Federal Reserve’s interest rate decision committee consists of seven governors appointed by the president and five voting members who rotate among the twelve regional Fed presidents. All members participate in the discussions. The disagreement revealed in the meeting minutes—the failure to distinguish between participants with and without voting rights—had already begun to emerge before the minutes were released. When policymakers decided to cut interest rates by 25 basis points in September, 10 out of 19 officials (a slight majority) included further rate cuts in their forecasts for October and December. However, this also meant that a significant minority opposed further rate cuts, citing improved labor markets or increasing inflationary pressures; some even supported a second rate cut in October. The recent end of the government shutdown exacerbated this divide, forcing a delay in the jobs and inflation reports that were supposed to help bridge the dispute over short-term interest rate decisions. Richmond Fed President Barkin admitted in an interview on Tuesday, "Without compelling data, it's difficult to reach a consensus among those with differing opinions." Because "no new circumstances have emerged that could foster consensus," he added, "it may need to be resolved through debate, and perhaps that's the approach we'll take." Investors who had previously considered a rate cut at the December 9-10 meeting a foregone conclusion are now beginning to believe the outcome is uncertain. Following the Labor Department's announcement on Wednesday that the October jobs data, originally scheduled for release on November 7, would be postponed until after the Federal Reserve meeting, the market's implied probability of a rate cut has plummeted to approximately 33%. Investors seem to believe that the lack of new jobs data that could reveal signs of economic weakness will reduce officials' willingness to support a December rate cut. Last month, two Federal Reserve officials voted against a rate cut for opposing reasons: Governor Milan advocated for a larger 50-basis-point cut, while Kansas City Fed President Schmid argued that the reasons for a rate cut were insufficient. The minutes emphasized that whatever decision the Federal Reserve makes in December, it will likely face at least three dissenting votes—three governors appointed by President Trump may oppose keeping interest rates unchanged, and at least three regional Fed presidents may oppose cutting rates. Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell faces a near-impossible task: bridging divisions and building consensus. Evercore ISI analyst Krishna Guha notes, "Unless luck strikes and the data miraculously points in the right direction, he will have to choose the lesser of two evils." Despite criticism that the Federal Reserve's consensus-seeking culture fosters "groupthink," Governor Waller made it clear on Monday that next month will be very different: "Be prepared, you may witness the least 'non-groupthink' phenomenon in the history of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC)." At the press conference following last month's meeting, Powell proactively mentioned that a December rate cut was not a certainty. He emphasized in an unusually frank tone: "Far from it," and stated that "more and more members now believe that we should at least hold off on action and wait for the next meeting to discuss it again." The state of the labor market is at the heart of these disagreements. Currently, companies are neither hiring on a large scale nor laying off workers extensively. Some policymakers are concerned that weak economic demand will lead businesses to reduce their workforce. Waller noted on Monday that more companies are "starting to discuss layoffs." This group of officials is relatively less concerned about inflation, believing that an economic downturn will limit businesses' room for price increases. They worry that overemphasizing the risk of persistent inflation could cause the economy to slip into recession unnoticed. Another group of officials believes the economy will continue to grow moderately and is concerned that inflation, which has been above the Fed's 2% target for four consecutive years, could persist for another two years due to tariff-related price increases. These officials are wary that businesses, emboldened by their success in passing on costs after the pandemic, could keep inflation at its current level of slightly below 3%, making it difficult to fall back to the 2% policy target. It is noteworthy that this camp is expanding. In addition to Schmidt, it includes the other three regional Fed presidents who have voting rights on monetary policy this year, as well as Fed Governor Barr.