Commonwealth Report Legislators Method

House · Democrat

Carol A. Doherty

Former member; served from 2019 in the sessions covered here and died (February 15, 2025); successor elected in special election June 10, 2025 · 3rd Bristol

Data through FY2026; built October 19, 2026.

Residence

Taunton

First elected

House 2020 (special)

Prior public offices

Taunton School Committee, 5 terms

Occupation

Educator

Left office

died (February 15, 2025); successor elected in special election June 10, 2025

Seats held, General Courts 189–194 (the FY2017–FY2026 budgets)
SessionChamberDistrictLinesNote
191st (2019–20)House3rd Bristol2011 lines
192nd (2021–22)House3rd Bristol2011 lines
193rd (2023–24)House3rd Bristol2021 lines
194th (2025–26)House3rd Bristol2021 lines

Posts and stipends

No stipend payments to Carol A. Doherty are recorded for 2016–2026.

Posts and stipends by session (stipends by calendar year)
SessionPostsFirst yearSecond year
191st (2019–20)No post recordednot available$0
192nd (2021–22)No post recorded$0$0
193rd (2023–24)No post recorded$0$0
194th (2025–26)No post recorded$0not available

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

3rd Bristol on its 2021 lines: 2 cities and towns, 45,685 residents (2020).

Taunton · Easton

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: 54 for all state aid and 27 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
191st (2019–20)3rd Bristol$671,000$0$7.50 · 22nd of 160$7.50 · 21st of 160
192nd (2021–22)3rd Bristol$614,000$0$6.86 · 76th of 160$6.86 · 75th of 160
193rd (2023–24)3rd Bristol$1.2M$0$12.68 · 39th of 160$12.68 · 37th of 160
194th (2025–26)3rd Bristol$21,000$0$0.46 · 159th of 160$0.46 · 159th 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
191st (2019–20)3rd Bristol$1M$11.64 · 19th of 160$1M$11.64 · 20th of 160
192nd (2021–22)3rd Bristol$1.4M$15.96 · 24th of 160$1.4M$16.10 · 26th of 160
193rd (2023–24)3rd Bristol$892,000$9.76 · 75th of 160$1.4M$14.87 · 48th of 160
194th (2025–26)3rd Bristol$221,000$4.83 · 122nd of 160$221,000$4.83 · 126th of 160

Budget amendments

Carol A. Doherty sponsored 32 budget amendments in FY2017–FY2026, asking for $5.2 million in all.

Amendments sponsored

32

FY2017–FY2026 budgets

Adopted, known outcomes

55%

12 of 22

Chamber rate, same ask sizes

63%

expected at the chamber’s rates

Of the 22 with a known outcome, 12 were adopted (55%). At the chamber’s adoption rate for amendments of the same size, about 14 (63%) would have been.

Largest enacted items matched to an amendment Carol A. Doherty filed (strong text matches)
YearAmountEnacted budget text (excerpt)Amendment
FY2025$75,000“the beautification and redevelopment of the Swift park in the town of Easton”H4600 #387
FY2024$75,000“the Taunton Area Community Table, Inc., a neighborhood food distribution center, to purchase the building currently being rented by the Taunton Area…”H3900 #600
FY2023$50,000“the Taunton fire department for roof repairs at three historic fire stations in the city of Taunton”H4700 #155
FY2023$50,000“the development of a plan for invasive weed mitigation of Lake Sabbatia in the city of Taunton”H4700 #156
FY2025$35,000“35 thermal imaging cameras for the Taunton fire department”H4600 #394

Strong matches: 8 enacted items, $360,000 (the member’s share where several amendments claim one clause). House attribution is inferred throughout, because the House adopts most amendments inside consolidated amendments.

21 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

Carol A. Doherty filed 44 bills as lead sponsor in these sessions; one was enacted on its own. In completed sessions, 0% 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 diedNo actionPending (session open)Enacted rateChamber medianCosponsored
191st (2019–20)House000000no bills filed4%6
192nd (2021–22)House8034100%3%356
193rd (2023–24)House17079100%4%434
194th (2025–26)House19190095%*1%1

Enacted bills as lead sponsor

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

Carol A. Doherty cast 21 yes-or-no votes on the 21 accountability roll calls in this file (seven yes, 14 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 TestimonyYesYeas 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 HoursYesYeas 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 VotesNoYeas 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

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

Carol A. Doherty’s committee reported $126,000 in contributions of $250 or more in years the member served, 2019–2026.

By year (years in the Legislature)
YearContributions
2019$250
2020$48,000
2021$6,500
2022$62,000
2023$3,500
2024$6,000
2026$0
By kind of contributor
KindTotalShare
Political committees and PACs$66,00053%
Individuals$49,00039%
Unions and associations$11,0009%
Individuals’ money by the employer they reported
Employer reportedShare
A named employer68%
Self-employed12%
Retired16%
Not employed3%

Not counted as contributions: $3,189 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).

Largest employers and organizations
Employer or organizationKindTotalContributions
MA DEMOCRATIC PARTYcommittee or PAC$25,0003
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTSindividuals, by employer$22,00015
MA DEMOCRATIC STATE COMMITTEEcommittee or PAC$21,00016
MASSACHUSETTS TEACHERS ASSOCIATIONunion or association$2,5006
TAUNTON DEMCCcommittee or PAC$2,2503
EASTON DEMTCcommittee or PAC$2,0002
MA & NORTHERN NE LABORERS' DISTRICT COUNCIL POL ACTION COMMcommittee or PAC$2,0004
RAISING MULTICULTURAL KIDSindividuals, by employer$2,0002
CARPENTERS LOCAL 330 MASSACHUSETTS PACcommittee or PAC$1,5003
WELLER INVESTMENTindividuals, by employer$1,3502

Source: Office of Campaign and Political Finance, itemized receipts of $250 or more since 2015; OCPF filer record: Doherty Committee (CPF 17413). 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.