House · Democrat

Jonathan Hecht

Former member, served 2015–2020 in the sessions covered here · 29th Middlesex

Data through FY2026; built October 19, 2026.

Residence

Watertown

First elected

House 2008

Prior public offices

Watertown Town Council; Local Government Advisory Commission

Occupation

Legislator/Attorney

Left office

did not seek reelection in 2020 (not a candidate in the 2020 primary or general election for this seat); term ended January 6, 2021

Seats held, General Courts 189–194 (the FY2017–FY2026 budgets)
Session	Chamber	District	Lines
189th (2015–16)	House	29th Middlesex	2011 lines
190th (2017–18)	House	29th Middlesex	2011 lines
191st (2019–20)	House	29th Middlesex	2011 lines

Posts and stipends

No stipend payments to Jonathan Hecht are recorded for 2016–2026.

Posts and stipends by session (stipends by calendar year)
Session	Posts	First year	Second year
189th (2015–16)	No post recorded	not available	$0
190th (2017–18)	No post recorded	$0	$0
191st (2019–20)	No post recorded	$0	$0

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

29th Middlesex on its 2011 lines: 2 cities and towns, 44,204 residents (2020).

Watertown 59%, 74% of the town · Cambridge 41%, 15% of the town

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: 30 for all state aid and 20 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)
Session	District	Dollars	In corrective clauses	Per resident per budget, rank	Without corrective clauses, rank
189th (2015–16)	29th Middlesex	$90,000	$0	$2.05 · 101st of 160	$2.05 · 99th of 160
190th (2017–18)	29th Middlesex	$143,000	$0	$1.62 · 136th of 160	$1.62 · 136th of 160
191st (2019–20)	29th Middlesex	$232,000	$0	$2.62 · 113th of 160	$2.62 · 113th 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)
Session	District	Placed in the district	Per resident per budget, rank	Everything placed	Per resident per budget, rank
189th (2015–16)	29th Middlesex	$90,000	$2.05 · 111th of 160	$90,000	$2.05 · 114th of 160
190th (2017–18)	29th Middlesex	$143,000	$1.62 · 149th of 160	$143,000	$1.62 · 150th of 160
191st (2019–20)	29th Middlesex	$232,000	$2.62 · 129th of 160	$232,000	$2.62 · 131st of 160

Budget amendments

Jonathan Hecht sponsored 18 budget amendments in FY2017–FY2026, asking for $312 million in all.

Amendments sponsored

FY2017–FY2026 budgets

Adopted, known outcomes

31%

4 of 13

Chamber rate, same ask sizes

61%

expected at the chamber’s rates

Of the 13 with a known outcome, four were adopted (31%). At the chamber’s adoption rate for amendments of the same size, about eight (61%) would have been.

Largest enacted items matched to an amendment Jonathan Hecht filed (strong text matches)
Year	Amount	Enacted budget text (excerpt)	Amendment
FY2018	$167,000 (shared three ways)	“school districts in which special education costs are more than 25 per cent of the total district costs and in which tuition and other…”	H3600 #195
FY2019	$125,000 (shared two ways)	“school districts in which special education costs exceed 25 per cent of the total district costs and in which tuition and other circuit-breaker…”	H4400 #187
FY2017	$50,000	“a grant to the 128 Business Council for planning and development of a transportation management association serving the Arsenal Street and Pleasant…”	H4200 #486

Strong matches: 3 enacted items, $342,000 (the member’s share where several amendments claim one clause). House attribution is inferred throughout, because the House adopts most amendments inside consolidated amendments.

13 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

Jonathan Hecht filed 62 bills as lead sponsor in these sessions; four were enacted on their own. In completed sessions, 6% of their lead bills were enacted on their own, against chamber medians of 4% to 7% 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
Session	Chamber	Lead bills	Enacted	Sent to study	Reported favorably, then died	Reported adversely or withdrawn	No action	Enacted rate	Chamber median	Cosponsored
189th (2015–16)	House	17	2	7	7	0	1	12%	6%	326
190th (2017–18)	House	18	1	9	8	0	0	6%	7%	375
191st (2019–20)	House	27	1	16	7	1	2	4%	4%	416

Enacted bills as lead sponsor

H3586 (189th): An Act authorizing the city known as the town of Watertown to increase the exemption for certain residential real property · Chapter 111 of the Acts of 2015
H4556 (189th): An Act establishing a sick leave bank for Irene Carr, an employee of the Division of Professional Licensure · Chapter 371 of the Acts of 2016
H3689 (190th): An Act authorizing the City known as the Town of Watertown to pay the funeral and burial expenses of firefighter Joseph Toscano · Chapter 32 of the Acts of 2017
H4241 (191st): An Act authorizing the city known as the town of Watertown to grant 15 additional licenses for the sale of alcoholic beverages to be drunk on the premises · Chapter 48 of the Acts of 2020

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

Jonathan Hecht cast 46 yes-or-no votes on the 46 accountability roll calls in this file (14 yes, 32 no).

Roll calls on rules, audits, public records, term limits and pay
Date	Measure	Vote	Chamber result
January 25, 2017	Recommit the 2017 pay-raise bill (H.58) to Ways and Means	No	Yeas 35, nays 125
January 25, 2017	Amd 3 (Lyons): legislators' raise not effective until next General Court	No	Yeas 40, nays 120
January 25, 2017	Amd 5 (Lyons): cap the increases at 4%	No	Yeas 36, nays 124
January 25, 2017	Engrossment of the pay-raise bill (stipend increases)	No	Yeas 116, nays 44
January 26, 2017	Enactment of the pay-raise bill	No	Yeas 116, nays 43
February 2, 2017	Override of Gov. Baker's veto of the pay-raise bill	No	Yeas 116, nays 43
February 2, 2017	Amendment 1.0 (Geoff Diehl): Text of the proposed House amendment (Representative Diehl) to the House Bill relative to Rank and File (House, No. 2017)	No	Yeas 34, nays 124
February 2, 2017	Sustain the Chair's ruling (point of order, Mr. Mark) against Diehl amd 2, Speaker term limits	Yes	Yeas 123, nays 33
February 2, 2017	Amendment 3.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): 24 Hour Time Frame for Bills to Be Acted On	No	Yeas 35, nays 124
February 2, 2017	Amendment 4.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Access to Information	No	Yeas 35, nays 124
February 2, 2017	Amendment 9.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Emergency Scheduling of Hearings	No	Yeas 38, nays 121
February 2, 2017	Amendment 10.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Equal Representation on Ethics Committee	No	Yeas 35, nays 124
February 2, 2017	Amendment 15.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Inoculators	No	Yeas 37, nays 122
February 2, 2017	Amendment 16.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Local Aid Resolution	No	Yeas 38, nays 121
February 2, 2017	Amendment 27.0 (James J. Lyons, Jr.): Defining and Limiting Informal Session	No	Yeas 34, nays 124
February 2, 2017	Amendment 20.0 (Shaunna L. O'Connell): Public access to House financial accounts audits	No	Yeas 34, nays 125
February 2, 2017	Amendment 21.0 (Shaunna L. O'Connell): Public access to committee votes	No	Yeas 41, nays 118
February 2, 2017	Amendment 5.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Local Aid Resolution	No	Yeas 37, nays 122
February 2, 2017	Amendment 11.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Committee Roll Calls on Website	No	Yeas 38, nays 121
February 2, 2017	Amendment 13.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Reports of Conference Filing Deadline	No	Yeas 37, nays 122
February 2, 2017	Amendment 14.0 (Shaunna L. O'Connell): Public access to committee votes	No	Yeas 38, nays 121
January 30, 2019	Amendment 1.0 (Jonathan Hecht): Time to review bills	Yes	Yeas 55, nays 103
January 30, 2019	Amendment 2.0 (Jonathan Hecht): Time to review amendments	Yes	Yeas 47, nays 111
January 30, 2019	Amendment 3.0 (Jonathan Hecht): Committee materials and votes	Yes	Yeas 49, nays 109
January 30, 2019	Collective bargaining for House employees (curb on leadership control of staff); not a disclosure/power-of-leadership rule in the narrow sense (contested meaning)	No	Yeas 9, nays 149
January 30, 2019	Amendment 11.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Access to Information	Yes	Yeas 40, nays 118
January 30, 2019	Amendment 12.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Emergency Scheduling of Hearings	No	Yeas 35, nays 123
January 30, 2019	Amendment 14.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Committee Polls – 2 Hours	Yes	Yeas 44, nays 114
January 30, 2019	Amendment 16.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): House Audits	No	Yeas 35, nays 123
January 30, 2019	Amendment 17.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): HWM Reports on Bills	No	Yeas 33, nays 125
January 30, 2019	Amendment 19.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Local Aid Resolution	No	Yeas 32, nays 126
January 30, 2019	Amendment 20.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Review of Consolidated Amendments	No	Yeas 32, nays 125
January 30, 2019	Amendment 22.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Committee Votes on Website	Yes	Yeas 44, nays 113
January 30, 2019	Fingerprint remote voting from committee rooms (contested meaning)	No	Yeas 32, nays 125
January 30, 2019	Amendment 25.0 (Marc T. Lombardo): Matters considered in an informal session	No	Yeas 32, nays 125
January 30, 2019	Amendment 31.0 (John H. Rogers): Relative to Rule 18C	Yes	Yeas 43, nays 113
January 30, 2019	Amendment 32.0 (Patrick Joseph Kearney): relative to Rule 100 ( c ) 3	No	Yeas 5, nays 152
January 30, 2019	Amendment 33.0 (Patrick Joseph Kearney): relative to Rule 20A and Rule 33A	No	Yeas 5, nays 152
January 30, 2019	Equitable office space (leadership allocates offices) (contested meaning)	Yes	Yeas 11, nays 146
January 30, 2019	Amendment 38.0 (Denise Provost): To assure adequate time to prepare and file amendments	Yes	Yeas 44, nays 113
January 30, 2019	Amendment 41.0 (Russell E. Holmes): Equal Pay Amendment II	No	Yeas 5, nays 152
January 30, 2019	House rules (H2019), rules package: on adoption of the order (contested meaning)	Yes	Yeas 125, nays 32
January 30, 2019	Conference-committee appointment deadline; adopted 157-0 (contested meaning)	Yes	Yeas 157, nays 0
January 30, 2019	Amendment 11.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Committee Roll Calls on Website	Yes	Yeas 47, nays 110
January 30, 2019	Amendment 12.0 (Marc T. Lombardo): Informal Session	No	Yeas 36, nays 121
January 30, 2019	Joint rules (H2021), rules package: on adoption of the order (contested meaning)	Yes	Yeas 157, 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

Jonathan Hecht’s committee reported $1,125 in contributions of $250 or more in years the member served, 2020–2020.

By year (years in the Legislature)
Year	Contributions
2020	$1,125

By kind of contributor
Kind	Total	Share
Individuals	$1,125	100%

Individuals’ money by the employer they reported
Employer reported	Share
A named employer	100%

Largest employers and organizations
Employer or organization	Kind	Total	Contributions
A M FUND	individuals, by employer	$625	1
MOVEMENT VOTER PROJECT	individuals, by employer	$500	1

Source: Office of Campaign and Political Finance, itemized receipts of $250 or more since 2015; OCPF filer record: Hecht Committee (CPF 14881). 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.