Recently, internal discussions at the Federal Reserve over whether to cut interest rates in December have drawn widespread attention. Institutional analyst Neil Irwin pointed out that the Fed is deeply divided on whether to cut rates next month, and the voting outcome could create a striking irony. This deadlock not only reflects disagreements over monetary policy but also involves a complex interplay of political pressure and individual stances.

According to analysis, if Fed Chair Powell, Vice Chair Jefferson, and New York Fed President Williams—the three core leaders—decide to push for a rate cut, they are likely to gain support from three Trump-appointed governors on the committee. However, this would only give them six votes out of the 12 voting members, still one short of a majority. In this scenario, Powell may need to turn to Biden-appointed governors to secure critical support.

Yet, this is no easy task. The four non-New York Fed presidents with voting rights at this meeting—Goolsbee, Collins, Musalem, and Schmid—have all expressed reservations about cutting rates, preferring a cautious approach to avoid exacerbating inflation risks. This further limits Powell’s options.

Among the Biden-appointed governors, Barr is seen as a potential supporter, but his recent concerns about inflation have deepened, leading him to advocate for a more prudent policy stance. Thus, he is likely to vote "no," further complicating Powell’s predicament. This leaves only one other governor as the key to securing the seventh vote: Cook.

Cook is known for her strong focus on the health of the labor market. She has maintained a low profile in policy actions and has been tight-lipped about her next moves. This cautious attitude makes her a potential "swing vote" in the current situation. But Cook’s role goes beyond that: she is also deeply entangled in political turmoil. The Supreme Court has scheduled a hearing for January 21 next year on whether former President Trump can fire her, and Trump has been trying to remove her since last fall. This backdrop means Cook’s vote is not only about economic policy but could also be influenced by external pressure.

If Cook ultimately votes in favor of a rate cut, she would not only help Powell secure a majority but could also trigger a series of political repercussions. The tension between Trump’s pressure attempts and Cook’s independent decision-making highlights the challenges the Fed faces in balancing economic goals and political interference. Moreover, the voting outcome could further intensify debates over the Fed’s independence, especially amid high inflation and uncertainty in the labor market.

Overall, the Fed’s December rate cut vote is not just a battle over economic policy but also a game of power and principles. Cook’s deciding vote could determine the policy direction while reflecting the vulnerability of U.S. monetary policy under political pressure. As the voting day approaches, markets and economic observers are closely watching how this deadlock evolves and its potential far-reaching impacts on the global economy.