Fed Governor Lisa Cook and Cleveland Fed President Beth Hammack dissented Oct. 28 in favor of raising interest rates, voting against the Federal Open Market Committee’s decision to leave them alone. The committee held its federal funds rate target at 3-3/4 to 4 percent by a 10-2 vote, with Cook and Hammack preferring a quarter-point increase.
The two dissents are the news inside a decision that changed nothing for borrowers or savers on the day. What readers with savings accounts, CDs or variable-rate debt want to know is whether a rise is still on the table, and the next date to watch is the Fed’s meeting on Dec. 8 and 9.
Stay ahead of government payment news: Miss an enrollment or claim deadline and the money can be gone. Join the Retirement Money Brief and we’ll send you our 2026 Government Check Reality Tracker as a welcome gift.
Get the Brief + the check tracker →
We may earn a commission from links on this page.
What exactly did the Fed decide?
The committee voted to maintain the target range for the federal funds rate, the rate banks charge one another for overnight loans, at 3-3/4 to 4 percent. Its statement says the committee is also continuing its policy of maintaining ample reserves in the banking system.
The Board of Governors’ implementation note sets the administered rates tied to that range. It kept the interest rate paid on reserve balances at 3.90 percent, effective Oct. 29, set the overnight reverse repurchase offering rate at 3.75 percent and left the primary credit rate at 4.0 percent.
The committee has 12 voting members, so a 10-2 count means ten backed the hold. Cook and Hammack voted against it, and in the statement’s wording they preferred to raise the target range by 1/4 percentage point at this meeting.
Why would two officials want a higher rate?
Cook sits on the Board of Governors in Washington, while Hammack heads the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland. Both hold votes on the committee, and both cast theirs for a quarter-point increase on Oct. 28.
The statement does not give the dissenters’ reasons, and it does not carry any individual explanation. What it does give is the committee’s description of the economy, which is the background to the argument for tighter policy.
Economic activity, it says, is expanding at a strong pace. Domestic spending has held up despite elevated uncertainty that the committee partly ties to geopolitical developments, productivity growth is strong and capital investment is robust.
On jobs, the statement says gains have kept pace with the workforce and the unemployment rate has changed little. On prices it is blunter: “Inflation remains elevated.” The committee says it will gather more information before deciding the policy stance needed for a timely return of inflation to its 2 percent goal.
How did the September vote look by comparison?
The Oct. 28 split follows a unanimous move. At its Sept. 16 meeting the committee raised the target range by a quarter point to the same 3-3/4 to 4 percent range, on a 12-0 vote with no dissents.
Where September was unanimous in favor of a higher rate, October produced two members who wanted to go further and ten who wanted to pause.
A dissent is a formal vote against the committee’s decision, and the statement names each dissenter and the action they preferred. It is the clearest public signal of where the committee is divided, since the vote count and the names are all the statement says about disagreement.
When does the Fed meet again?
The next scheduled meeting is Dec. 8 to 9, according to the Fed’s meeting calendar. The calendar marks it with an asterisk, which means the meeting includes a new Summary of Economic Projections, the committee’s updated forecasts for the economy and rates.
The most recent projections came at the Sept. 15-16 meeting, which carries the same asterisk, so December brings the next update. After that, the first meeting of 2027 is Jan. 26 to 27.
The 2026 calendar had eight meetings in all, and the Oct. 27-28 session was the seventh. Only the December meeting remains this year, which gives the dissenters one more vote before the calendar turns.
The committee has made no promise about what it will do at the December meeting. Its statement ties any future change to the information it gathers on the economy and inflation, and the dissents mean at least two members already lean toward higher rates.
What does a hold with two hike votes mean for savers?
With the range unchanged, this decision does not by itself change the benchmark that savings and loan rates are measured against. The two dissents mean a rise is a live question for December, not a certainty, and nothing in the statement commits the committee in either direction.
For people holding cash, the practical point is that the Fed raised rates at its September meeting and left them alone in October, with elevated inflation still the committee’s stated concern. Anyone with money earning less than the market pays can compare what the account earns now against what insured options offer.
Where should your cash sit if rates could rise again in December?
Two Fed officials voted to raise rates Oct. 28, and the committee meets again Dec. 8 and 9 with inflation still described as elevated. Cash left in an account that pays a near-zero rate loses ground to rising prices whether or not the Fed moves.
Make Your Savings Pay You is an 11-page guide to the safe places that pay more than a near-zero bank account, including I bonds whose rate adjusts with inflation every six months. It also covers keeping every dollar insured, even above $250,000 at one bank, and starts with what your cash earns now, found on your statement in five minutes.
Get the guide to I bonds whose rate adjusts with inflation every six months →
This article was produced with AI assistance and edited for accuracy against the sources linked above.
Warren Cohen is a finance writer based in Phoenix, Arizona, covering personal finance topics including credit, banking, and beginner investing. He earned his degree in business administration from Arizona State University and began his career working in consumer finance, where he gained direct experience with lending and credit systems. He now writes for personal finance websites and fintech platforms, focusing on clear, practical content that helps readers make informed financial decisions.
