Commonwealth Report Legislators Method

Senate · Republican

Donald F. Humason, Jr.

Former member, served 2015–2020 in the sessions covered here · Second Hampden and Hampshire

Data through FY2026; built October 19, 2026.

Residence

Westfield

First elected

House 2002; Senate 2013 (special)

Occupation

Legislator

Left office

left to take office: another office (term began January 6, 2020) (January 5, 2020); successor elected in special election May 19, 2020

Seats held, General Courts 189–194 (the FY2017–FY2026 budgets)
SessionChamberDistrictLinesNote
189th (2015–16)SenateSecond Hampden and Hampshire2011 lines
190th (2017–18)SenateSecond Hampden and Hampshire2011 lines
191st (2019–20)SenateSecond Hampden and Hampshire2011 lines

Posts and stipends

Donald F. Humason, Jr. was paid $123,495 in leadership and committee stipends from 2016 to 2020.

Posts and stipends by session (stipends by calendar year)
SessionPostsFirst yearSecond year
189th (2015–16)Minority Whipnot available$15,000
190th (2017–18)Assistant Minority Leader$35,000$35,000
191st (2019–20)Assistant Minority Leader (to 2020)$37,912$583

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

Second Hampden and Hampshire on its 2011 lines: 11 cities and towns, 156,291 residents (2020).

Westfield · Holyoke · Agawam · Easthampton · Chicopee · Southwick · Southampton · Russell · Granville · Montgomery · Tolland

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: 57 for all state aid and 52 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
189th (2015–16)Second Hampden and Hampshire$652,000$0$4.17 · 12th of 40$4.17 · 12th of 40
190th (2017–18)Second Hampden and Hampshire$1.3M$0$4.23 · 18th of 40$4.23 · 18th of 40
191st (2019–20)Second Hampden and Hampshire$1.3M$0$4.31 · 19th of 40$4.31 · 19th of 40

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
189th (2015–16)Second Hampden and Hampshire$627,000$4.01 · 19th of 40$727,000$4.65 · 17th of 40
190th (2017–18)Second Hampden and Hampshire$1.4M$4.45 · 24th of 40$1.5M$4.79 · 22nd of 40
191st (2019–20)Second Hampden and Hampshire$1.6M$5.27 · 18th of 40$1.6M$5.27 · 21st of 40

Budget amendments

Donald F. Humason, Jr. sponsored 91 budget amendments in FY2017–FY2026, asking for $38.5 million in all.

Amendments sponsored

91

FY2017–FY2026 budgets

Adopted, known outcomes

41%

37 of 91

Chamber rate, same ask sizes

52%

expected at the chamber’s rates

Of the 91 with a known outcome, 37 were adopted (41%). At the chamber’s adoption rate for amendments of the same size, about 47 (52%) would have been.

Largest enacted items matched to an amendment Donald F. Humason, Jr. filed (strong text matches)
YearAmountEnacted budget text (excerpt)Amendment
FY2019$175,000“Craig's Doors – A Home Association, Inc. in the town of Amherst”S4 #804
FY2019$150,000“the Empowering Mothers for Positive Outcomes with Early Referral Program at Baystate Medical Center, Inc”S4 #592
FY2020$142,000“maintenance equipment in the town of Southwick”S3 #135
FY2017$100,000“facility construction, upgrades or repairs for public schools in the city known as the town of Agawam”S4 #107
FY2017$100,000“high school students enrolled at Holyoke Community College”S4 #219

Strong matches: 26 enacted items, $1.5 million (the member’s share where several amendments claim one clause).

For 13 amendments the sponsor is the first mover named in the amendment text, because the Legislature’s record listed none. 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

Donald F. Humason, Jr. filed 128 bills as lead sponsor in these sessions; 12 were enacted on their own. In completed sessions, 9% 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 billsEnactedFolded into an enacted billSent to studyReported favorably, then diedReported adversely or withdrawnNo actionEnacted rateChamber medianCosponsored
189th (2015–16)Senate445021110711%4%203
190th (2017–18)Senate36502640114%3%235
191st (2019–20)Senate4822348204%3%229

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

Donald F. Humason, Jr. cast 20 yes-or-no votes on the 20 accountability roll calls in this file (18 yes, two no).

Roll calls on rules, audits, public records, term limits and pay
DateMeasureVoteChamber result
January 26, 2017Senate engrossment of the pay-raise billNoYeas 31, nays 9
February 2, 2017Amendment 2.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Matters considered in an informal sessionYesYeas 38, nays 0
February 2, 2017Amendment 3.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Time to consider matters in an informalYesYeas 39, nays 0
February 2, 2017Amendment 7.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Provided with text of bills prior to pollYesYeas 39, nays 0
February 2, 2017Special orders by majority instead of two-thirds (contested meaning)YesYeas 6, nays 33
February 2, 2017Amendment 11.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Unanimous consentYesYeas 6, nays 33
February 2, 2017Amendment 13.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Timely Local Aid NotificationYesYeas 7, nays 32
February 2, 2017Senate override of the veto of the pay-raise billNoYeas 31, nays 9
January 31, 2019Amendment 1.1 (Bruce E. Tarr): Posting of Committee Roll Call VotesYesYeas 39, nays 0
January 31, 2019Amendment 1.0 (Walter F. Timilty): Improving Access to RecordsYesYeas 39, nays 0
January 31, 2019Amendment 2.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Informal SessionYesYeas 39, nays 0
January 31, 2019Amendment 3.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Conference Committee ReportYesYeas 8, nays 31
January 31, 2019Amendment 11.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Audit of accountsYesYeas 39, nays 0
not availableJoint rules (S9), rules package: question on acceptance of the report (contested meaning)YesYeas 39, nays 0
January 31, 2019Amendment 1.0 (Diana DiZoglio): Non disclosure agreementsYesYeas 39, nays 0
January 31, 2019Amendment 7.1 (Rebecca L. Rausch): anti-harassment and assaultYesYeas 39, nays 0
January 31, 2019Amendment 5.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Numbers of bills considered at a hearingYesYeas 8, nays 31
January 31, 2019Amendment 17.0 (Ryan C. Fattman): Matters considered in an informal sessionYesYeas 6, nays 33
January 31, 2019Amendment 25.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Unanimous consentYesYeas 6, nays 33
not availableSenate rules (S8), rules package: question on acceptance of the report (contested meaning)YesYeas 39, 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

Donald F. Humason, Jr.’s committee reported $100,000 in contributions of $250 or more in years the member served, 2015–2020.

By year (years in the Legislature)
YearContributions
2015$9,725
2016$33,000
2017$8,250
2018$14,000
2019$26,000
2020$8,650
By kind of contributor
KindTotalShare
Individuals$79,00080%
Political committees and PACs$20,00020%
Individuals’ money by the employer they reported
Employer reportedShare
A named employer67%
Self-employed16%
Retired11%
Not reported or withheld6%

Not counted as contributions: $28,000 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 $10,000 in years the member was not in the Legislature (2021), for example while running for another office. Those receipts are not in the totals above.

Largest employers and organizations
Employer or organizationKindTotalContributions
COMMERCIAL DISTRIBUTINGindividuals, by employer$9,50012
MARLBOROUGH REPCCcommittee or PAC$5,2908
PINSLY RRindividuals, by employer$3,6006
SHORTSTOP GRILLindividuals, by employer$3,5005
COMM OF MAindividuals, by employer$2,7005
WESTFIELD ELECTROPLATINGindividuals, by employer$2,5005
MA & NORTHERN NE LABORERS' DISTRICT COUNCIL POL ACTION COMMcommittee or PAC$2,5005
REPUBLICAN STATE COMMITTEEcommittee or PAC$2,0843
HAMPSHIRE TOWINGindividuals, by employer$1,5504
E MOUNTAIN CCindividuals, by employer$1,4503

Source: Office of Campaign and Political Finance, itemized receipts of $250 or more since 2015; OCPF filer record: Humason Jr. Committee (CPF 13888). 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.