Commonwealth Report Legislators Method

House · Democrat

Garrett J. Bradley

Former member, served 2015–2016 in the sessions covered here · 3rd Plymouth

Data through FY2026; built October 19, 2026.

Residence

Hingham

First elected

House 2000

Left office

left office mid-term (July 31, 2016)

Seats held, General Courts 189–194 (the FY2017–FY2026 budgets)
SessionChamberDistrictLinesNote
189th (2015–16)House3rd Plymouth2011 lines

Posts and stipends

No stipend payments to Garrett J. Bradley are recorded for 2016–2026.

Posts and stipends by session (stipends by calendar year)
SessionPostsFirst yearSecond year
189th (2015–16)2nd Assistant Majority Leadernot availablenot 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 Plymouth on its 2011 lines: 4 cities and towns, 41,658 residents (2020).

Hingham · Hull · Cohasset · Scituate

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: 33 for all state aid and 41 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)3rd Plymouth$464,000$0$11.13 · 8th of 160$11.13 · 8th 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
189th (2015–16)3rd Plymouth$422,000$10.14 · 12th of 160$505,000$12.13 · 11th of 160

Budget amendments

Garrett J. Bradley sponsored six budget amendments in FY2017–FY2026, asking for $6.8 million in all.

Amendments sponsored

6

FY2017–FY2026 budgets

Adopted, known outcomes

80%

4 of 5

Chamber rate, same ask sizes

34%

expected at the chamber’s rates

Of the five with a known outcome, four were adopted (80%). At the chamber’s adoption rate for amendments of the same size, about two (34%) would have been.

Largest enacted items matched to an amendment Garrett J. Bradley filed (strong text matches)
YearAmountEnacted budget text (excerpt)Amendment
FY2017$50,000 (shared two ways)“a school resource officer for the town of Cohasset public schools”H4200 #451

Strong matches: 1 enacted item, $50,000 (the member’s share where several amendments claim one clause). A further two weaker text matches are 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.

3 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

Garrett J. Bradley filed 67 bills as lead sponsor in these sessions; nine were enacted on their own. In completed sessions, 13% of their lead bills were enacted on their own, against a chamber median of 6% 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 actionEnacted rateChamber medianCosponsored
189th (2015–16)House6793519413%6%24

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

No recorded votes for Garrett J. Bradley on the accountability measures in this file.

The file covers selected roll calls on the Legislature’s own rules, audits, public records, term limits and pay, 2017–2026.

Campaign money in

Garrett J. Bradley’s committee reported $48,000 in contributions of $250 or more in years the member served, 2015–2016.

By year (years in the Legislature)
YearContributions
2015$36,000
2016$11,000
By kind of contributor
KindTotalShare
Individuals$41,00086%
Political committees and PACs$6,45014%
Individuals’ money by the employer they reported
Employer reportedShare
A named employer38%
Self-employed23%
Retired2%
Homemaker or at home6%
Not reported or withheld32%

Not counted as contributions: $5,165 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
NIXON PEABODYindividuals, by employer$1,5006
MA & NORTHERN NE LABORERS' DISTRICT COUNCIL POL ACTION COMMcommittee or PAC$1,0002
MASSACHUSETTS BRICK LAYERS PEOPLE'S COMMITTEEcommittee or PAC$1,0002
RETIRED PUBLIC EMPLOYEES PACcommittee or PAC$1,0002
ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENTindividuals, by employer$1,0002
CITY OF QUINCYindividuals, by employer$1,0002
HORIZON BEVERAGE GROUPindividuals, by employer$1,0002
LABATON AND SUCHAROWindividuals, by employer$1,0001
THORTON AND NAUMESindividuals, by employer$1,0001
HORIZON BEVERAGEindividuals, by employer$1,0001

Source: Office of Campaign and Political Finance, itemized receipts of $250 or more since 2015; OCPF filer record: Bradley Committee (CPF 13228). 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.