Three Fed Officials Explain Why They Dissented, Blasting Fed’s “Easing Bias” This morning, three Fed officials said they dissented over this week’s policy statement because it was no longer appropriate to signal the Fed’s next move was still likely to be an interest-rate cut. “I believe the FOMC should offer a policy outlook that signals that the next rate change could be either a cut or a hike, depending on how the economy evolves,” Minneapolis Fed president Neel Kashkari said in an essay released on Friday morning. “This could tighten financial conditions somewhat today, pushing back against a high-inflation scenario that could require an even stronger monetary policy response in the future.” This week’s move marked the fifth dissent for Kashkari, formerly a vocal dove, who is currently one of the longest serving reserve bank president among the 12 regional leaders. His last vote against the majority of the committee was in 2020, when he opposed statement language that he saw as leaning too much toward rate hikes. In 2017, he dissented against each of the three interest rate increases that year. In his essay, Kashkari laid out two scenarios in which the Middle East conflict could play out. If the Straight of Hormuz were to reopen fairly quickly, underlying inflation would likely be around 3% for a third straight year, pressuring consumers and perhaps the labor market as well. That would likely require the Fed to stay on hold for an extended period before lowering rates gradually, he said. If the conflict were to drag on, though, it would drive up both inflation and unemployment in the US. Given that inflation has been above the Fed’s target for five years, that could unmoor long-term inflation expectations and lead the Fed to raise interest rates in a bid to reverse that, he said. “Rate increases,

No one really knows the health consequences of adding silicon to biological hardware