Commonwealth Report Legislators Method

House · Democrat

Brandy Fluker-Reid

Current member · 12th Suffolk

Data through FY2026; built October 19, 2026.

Residence

Boston

First elected

House 2020

Seats held, General Courts 189–194 (the FY2017–FY2026 budgets)
SessionChamberDistrictLinesNote
192nd (2021–22)House12th Suffolk2011 lines
193rd (2023–24)House12th Suffolk2021 lines
194th (2025–26)House12th Suffolk2021 lines

Posts and stipends

Brandy Fluker-Reid was paid $54,069 in leadership and committee stipends from 2023 to 2026 (2026 to date).

Posts and stipends by session (stipends by calendar year)
SessionPostsFirst yearSecond year
192nd (2021–22)No post recorded$0$0
193rd (2023–24)Vice chair, Joint Committee on Racial Equity, Civil Rights, and Inclusion$7,096$7,096
194th (2025–26)Vice chair, Joint Committee on the Judiciary$22,431$17,446 (to date)

Posts: the Legislature’s leadership and roster records as compiled for this project; where those name no post, the member’s committee chair, vice-chair and ranking roles from the Legislature’s member profiles. Stipends: additional compensation in the Comptroller’s payroll data (CTHRU dataset 9ttk-7vz6), 2016–2026; 2026 is the year to date. Stipends for 2015 are not available. Base salary is not included.

The district

12th Suffolk on its 2021 lines: 2 cities and towns, 42,832 residents (2020).

Boston · Milton

Percentages are each place’s share of the district’s 2020 residents; for a town split between districts, the share of the town inside this one follows.

Population-weighted Fairness Index of the district’s cities and towns: 41 for all state aid and 36 for discretionary money (50 is a fair share).

Local earmarks are counted three ways. District money uses the first, clauses that name a place in the district; the second table adds organizations located in the district (placed in the district) and state facilities located there (everything placed). Three ways to count a local earmark.

District money, first measure: enacted earmarks in clauses naming a place in the district, by session (district money, not the member’s)
SessionDistrictDollarsIn corrective clausesPer resident per budget, rankWithout corrective clauses, rank
192nd (2021–22)12th Suffolk$876,000$59,000$10.59 · 31st of 160$9.88 · 31st of 160
193rd (2023–24)12th Suffolk$1.6M$0$18.44 · 18th of 160$18.44 · 18th of 160
194th (2025–26)12th Suffolk$1.1M$0$26.11 · 12th of 160$26.11 · 12th of 160

District money is where enacted earmarks land, by the place a clause names, mapped to districts by 2020 population; it is not attributed to the member and does not include leadership’s base-text money that names no place. Ranks are of district money per resident among the chamber’s districts, 1 = most. “In corrective clauses” is the part carried by a Ways and Means chair’s corrective amendments, which is leadership’s money; the last column gives the per-resident figure and rank without it. Sessions are labeled by the General Court that enacted each budget. Per-resident figures use the district as drawn for each session (2011 lines through the 192nd General Court, 2021 lines from the 193rd), so they will not equal a session’s dollars divided by the resident count above.

The same district on the other two measures, by session (enacted; includes any corrective-clause money)
SessionDistrictPlaced in the districtPer resident per budget, rankEverything placedPer resident per budget, rank
192nd (2021–22)12th Suffolk$1.4M$17.10 · 19th of 160$1.5M$17.82 · 21st of 160
193rd (2023–24)12th Suffolk$2.7M$31.47 · 14th of 160$2.8M$32.83 · 15th of 160
194th (2025–26)12th Suffolk$1.6M$36.52 · 13th of 160$1.7M$39.28 · 18th of 160

Budget amendments

Brandy Fluker-Reid sponsored 59 budget amendments in FY2017–FY2026, asking for $31.1 million in all.

Amendments sponsored

59

FY2017–FY2026 budgets

Adopted, known outcomes

68%

30 of 44

Chamber rate, same ask sizes

59%

expected at the chamber’s rates

Of the 44 with a known outcome, 30 were adopted (68%). At the chamber’s adoption rate for amendments of the same size, about 26 (59%) would have been.

Largest enacted items matched to an amendment Brandy Fluker-Reid filed (strong text matches)
YearAmountEnacted budget text (excerpt)Amendment
FY2026$500,000“the HBCU Kickoff Classic Weekend at Harvard University to support venue infrastructure, logistics, community engagement, and marketing for the August…”H4000 #797
FY2024$500,000“the Black Economic Council of Massachusetts, Inc”H3900 #1355
FY2026$250,000“the Massachusetts Sickle Cell Association, Inc. to support advocacy, family support services, awareness campaigns, and staff expansion to improve…”H4000 #803
FY2025$250,000“not less than $250,000 to the Big Sister Association of Greater Boston, Inc”H4600 #1141
FY2025$250,000“the Sickle Cell Disease Association of Massachusetts, Inc”H4600 #1317

Strong matches: 25 enacted items, $3.8 million (the member’s share where several amendments claim one clause). A further one weaker text match is not listed; attribution is inferred from amendment text and is less certain there. House attribution is inferred throughout, because the House adopts most amendments inside consolidated amendments.

43 outcomes are inferred by matching amendment text to the House’s consolidated amendments, because the House records most amendments only as “Consolidated A–G.” Ask size is the larger of the earmark dollars and the line-item change an amendment requests; bands: no dollar amount, under $50,000, $50,000–$250,000, $250,000–$1 million, $1–5 million, $5 million or more. Leadership’s unattributed base-text and corrective-amendment money is never assigned to a member. The comparison describes outcomes; it is not a measure of merit.

Bills sponsored

Brandy Fluker-Reid filed 58 bills as lead sponsor in these sessions; seven were enacted on their own. In completed sessions, 3% of their lead bills were enacted on their own, against chamber medians of 3% to 4% for the same sessions.

Most bills die in every legislature, and many policies pass inside other bills; the chamber median for the same session is the fair comparison.

Bills filed as lead sponsor, by session and outcome
SessionChamberLead billsEnactedSent to studyReported favorably, then diedPending (session open)Enacted rateChamber medianCosponsored
192nd (2021–22)House906300%3%127
193rd (2023–24)House23171504%4%68
194th (2025–26)House266601423%*1%34

Enacted bills as lead sponsor

  • H2520 (193rd): An Act directing the City of Boston Police Department to waive the maximum age requirement for police officers for Wilfrid Decossa · Chapter 3 of the Acts of 2023
  • H3925 (194th): An Act directing the city of Boston Police Department to waive the maximum age requirement for Pierre Charles Darius of Mattapan · Chapter 52 of the Acts of 2026
  • H3926 (194th): An Act directing the city of Boston Police Department to waive the maximum age requirement for police officers for Keny Gateau · Chapter 125 of the Acts of 2026
  • H3927 (194th): An Act directing the city of Boston Police Department to waive the maximum age requirement for police officers for Jean E. Roseney · Chapter 127 of the Acts of 2026
  • H3928 (194th): An Act directing the city of Boston Police Department to waive the maximum age requirement for police officers for Adam Watt · Chapter 126 of the Acts of 2026
  • H4254 (194th): An Act directing the city of Boston police department to waive the maximum age requirement for police officers for Rodney Alcindor · Chapter 131 of the Acts of 2026
  • H4255 (194th): An Act directing the city of Boston police department to waive the maximum age requirement for police officers for Jonathan Telfort · Chapter 132 of the Acts of 2026

Outcomes are the furthest point each bill reached in the record. “Folded into an enacted bill” means the history names the enacted bill that absorbed it. “Passed both branches; no chapter recorded” means the bill was enacted by both branches and laid before the Governor, with no chapter or veto in the history; in the 194th General Court such bills are shown as laid before the Governor (pending). The 194th General Court is in session until January 2027, so its open bills are pending, not dead, and its rates (*) are not comparable with completed sessions. Chairs and leaders control the calendar, which raises their rates. Source: malegislature.gov bill histories.

Recorded votes on accountability measures

Brandy Fluker-Reid cast 35 yes-or-no votes on the 35 accountability roll calls in this file (ten yes, 25 no).

Roll calls on rules, audits, public records, term limits and pay
DateMeasureVoteChamber result
February 24, 2021Amendment 8.0 (Erika Uyterhoeven): Public Committee Votes and TestimonyNoYeas 36, nays 122
February 24, 2021Amendment 3.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Electronic PollNoYeas 38, nays 121
February 24, 2021Amendment 6.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Procurement AmendmentNoYeas 34, nays 125
February 24, 2021Amendment 11.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Conference Committee ReportNoYeas 35, nays 123
February 24, 2021Joint rules (H68), rules package: on adoption of the Order (contested meaning)YesYeas 128, nays 31
July 7, 2021Remote voting for members on military duty; adopted 160-0 (contested meaning)YesYeas 160, nays 0
July 7, 2021Amendment 2.0 (Tami L. Gouveia): Speaker Term LimitsNoYeas 35, nays 125
July 7, 2021Amendment 6.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Emergency Scheduling of HearingsNoYeas 30, nays 129
July 7, 2021Amendment 9.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Committee Polls - 2 HoursNoYeas 35, nays 124
July 7, 2021Amendment 11.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Access to InformationNoYeas 33, nays 126
July 7, 2021Amendment 13.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Review of Consolidated AmendmentsNoYeas 32, nays 127
July 7, 2021Amendment 12.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Committee Votes on WebsiteNoYeas 38, nays 121
July 7, 2021Amendment 16.0 (Erika Uyterhoeven): Public Committee VotesYesYeas 41, nays 117
July 7, 2021Amendment 3.0 (Christopher M. Markey): Review Period for Released BillsNoYeas 39, nays 119
July 7, 2021House rules (H3930), rules package: on adoption of the order (contested meaning)YesYeas 129, nays 29
February 1, 2023Amendment 7.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Time to review technical/ perfecting amendmentsNoYeas 23, nays 130
February 1, 2023Amendment 12.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Review of Consolidated AmendmentsNoYeas 23, nays 130
February 1, 2023House rules (H2023), rules package: on adoption of the order (contested meaning)YesYeas 153, nays 0
February 1, 2023Amendment 3.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Local Aid ResolutionNoYeas 23, nays 130
February 1, 2023Amendment 9.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Hearing ScheduleNoYeas 24, nays 129
February 1, 2023Joint rules (H2025), rules package: on adoption of the order (contested meaning)YesYeas 153, nays 0
February 25, 2025Amendment 2.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Roll CallsNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025Amendment 3.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Formal Session NotificationNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025Amendment 4.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): General Court AuditsNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025Amendment 5.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Opinion of the JusticesNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025Amendment 6.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Committee PollsNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025Amendment 7.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Committee Poll NotificationNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025Joint rules (H2026), rules package: on adoption of the order (contested meaning)YesYeas 128, nays 23
February 25, 2025Amendment 18.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Time to Review LegislationNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025Amendment 17.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Audit by State AuditorNoYeas 24, nays 127
February 25, 2025Amendment 2.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Committee PollsNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025Amendment 3.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Committee Poll NotificationsNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025House rules (H2024), rules package: on adoption of the order (contested meaning)YesYeas 128, nays 23
June 26, 2025Joint rules (conference report) (S2545), rules package: on acceptance (contested meaning)YesYeas 147, nays 2
June 3, 2026Engross H.5469 (public records law applied to the Legislature). Reform advocates split (contested meaning)YesYeas 125, nays 28

Votes marked “contested meaning” are rules-package and public-records passage votes; reform advocates were on both sides of them. Descriptions are the project’s plain summaries of each question, or the question as recorded for rules-package roll calls; the official record is on malegislature.gov. Votes are facts; no score is computed.

Campaign money in

Brandy Fluker-Reid’s committee reported $93,000 in contributions of $250 or more in years the member served, 2021–2026.

By year (years in the Legislature)
YearContributions
2021$10,000
2022$9,050
2023$32,000
2024$17,000
2025$19,000
2026$6,300
By kind of contributor
KindTotalShare
Individuals$68,00073%
Political committees and PACs$22,00023%
Unions and associations$3,5504%
Individuals’ money by the employer they reported
Employer reportedShare
A named employer50%
Self-employed29%
Retired3%
Not employed13%
Homemaker or at home2%
Not reported or withheld4%

Not counted as contributions: $5,576 in other receipts of $250 or more in the same years (candidate loans and the candidate’s own money, transfers, refunds, bank interest and aggregated small receipts).

The same committee also reported $58,000 in years the member was not in the Legislature (2020), for example while running for another office. Those receipts are not in the totals above.

Largest employers and organizations
Employer or organizationKindTotalContributions
RETIRED PUBLIC EMPLOYEES PACcommittee or PAC$2,3005
MAX FOUNDATIONindividuals, by employer$2,0002
MA & NORTHERN NE LABORERS' DISTRICT COUNCIL POL ACTION COMMcommittee or PAC$1,0002
1199 SEIU - MA PACcommittee or PAC$1,0002
AJC PARTNERSindividuals, by employer$1,0001
ALSTON STREET ASSOCIATESindividuals, by employer$1,0001
BOSTON COMMERCIAL LENDINGindividuals, by employer$1,0001
DEVOTED HEALTHindividuals, by employer$1,0002
DRTindividuals, by employer$1,0001
FREMONT CAPITALindividuals, by employer$1,0001

Source: Office of Campaign and Political Finance, itemized receipts of $250 or more since 2015; OCPF filer record: Fluker-Reid Committee (CPF 17478). Individuals are grouped by the employer they reported; no individual contributor is named, and an employer field that is a person’s name is withheld. Massachusetts bars business contributions to candidates. Employer shows affiliation, not instruction.

Sources

Every figure traces to a public record.

Facts only: posts, stipends, sponsored amendments, enacted items, roll-call votes and district money. No score or grade is computed. Associations shown here are not evidence of cause. Method.