Senate · Democrat

Joseph A. Boncore

Former member, served 2015–2021 in the sessions covered here · First Suffolk and Middlesex

Data through FY2026; built October 19, 2026.

Residence

Winthrop

First elected

Senate 2016 (special)

Left office

resigned (September 9, 2021); successor elected in special election January 11, 2022

Seats held, General Courts 189–194 (the FY2017–FY2026 budgets)
Session	Chamber	District	Lines
189th (2015–16)	Senate	First Suffolk and Middlesex	2011 lines
190th (2017–18)	Senate	First Suffolk and Middlesex	2011 lines
191st (2019–20)	Senate	First Suffolk and Middlesex	2011 lines
192nd (2021–22)	Senate	First Suffolk and Middlesex	2011 lines

Posts and stipends

Joseph A. Boncore was paid $180,173 in leadership and committee stipends from 2017 to 2021.

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)	Chair, Joint Committee on Housing; Vice chair, Joint Committee on Health Care Financing	$20,200	$48,123
191st (2019–20)	Chair, Joint Committee on Transportation; Vice chair, Senate Committee on Rules	$38,129	$38,129
192nd (2021–22)	Title not in the roster records; a stipend was paid	$35,593	not 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

First Suffolk and Middlesex on its 2011 lines: 4 cities and towns, 197,275 residents (2020).

Boston 47%, 14% of the town · Revere 32% · Cambridge 12%, 20% of the town · Winthrop 10%

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: 48 for all state aid and 40 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)	First Suffolk and Middlesex	$861,000	$0	$4.36 · 10th of 40	$4.36 · 10th of 40
190th (2017–18)	First Suffolk and Middlesex	$2.2M	$21,000	$5.57 · 9th of 40	$5.51 · 10th of 40
191st (2019–20)	First Suffolk and Middlesex	$6M	$557,000	$15.09 · 1st of 40	$13.68 · 1st of 40
192nd (2021–22)	First Suffolk and Middlesex	$7.8M	$3M	$19.87 · 1st of 40	$12.27 · 5th 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)
Session	District	Placed in the district	Per resident per budget, rank	Everything placed	Per resident per budget, rank
189th (2015–16)	First Suffolk and Middlesex	$1.4M	$7.00 · 7th of 40	$1.7M	$8.38 · 6th of 40
190th (2017–18)	First Suffolk and Middlesex	$5.9M	$14.84 · 3rd of 40	$6.4M	$16.25 · 2nd of 40
191st (2019–20)	First Suffolk and Middlesex	$13.8M	$34.95 · 1st of 40	$14.3M	$36.36 · 1st of 40
192nd (2021–22)	First Suffolk and Middlesex	$22M	$55.76 · 1st of 40	$23.6M	$59.74 · 1st of 40

Budget amendments

Joseph A. Boncore sponsored 152 budget amendments in FY2017–FY2026, asking for $155 million in all.

Amendments sponsored

152

FY2017–FY2026 budgets

Adopted, known outcomes

40%

61 of 152

Chamber rate, same ask sizes

41%

expected at the chamber’s rates

Of the 152 with a known outcome, 61 were adopted (40%). At the chamber’s adoption rate for amendments of the same size, about 63 (41%) would have been.

Largest enacted items matched to an amendment Joseph A. Boncore filed (strong text matches)
Year	Amount	Enacted budget text (excerpt)	Amendment
FY2022	$250,000	“the New England Aquarium Corporation in the city of Boston”	S3 #776
FY2022	$250,000	“the provision of emergency services, including domestic violence intervention, workforce development, housing assistance, operation of food vouchers…”	S3 #854
FY2019	$250,000	“Jewish Vocational Services with a targeted focus on academic and coaching support for immigrants and refugees”	S4 #263
FY2020	$200,000	“the United Way of Tri-County’s Call 2 Talk program”	S3 #653
FY2019	$200,000	“a federally-qualified community health center with a 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a-week emergency department licensed as a satellite unit under 105 CMR 1304”	S4 #461

Strong matches: 29 enacted items, $2.6 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.

For 76 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

Joseph A. Boncore filed 156 bills as lead sponsor in these sessions; zero were enacted on their own. In completed sessions, 0% of their lead bills were enacted on their own, against chamber medians of 2% 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
Session	Chamber	Lead bills	Folded into an enacted bill	Sent to study	Reported favorably, then died	Reported adversely or withdrawn	No action	Enacted rate	Chamber median	Cosponsored
189th (2015–16)	Senate	1	0	0	0	0	1	0%	4%	3
190th (2017–18)	Senate	35	1	21	7	0	6	0%	3%	92
191st (2019–20)	Senate	53	3	27	17	4	2	0%	3%	276
192nd (2021–22)	Senate	67	1	35	22	8	1	0%	2%	80

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

Joseph A. Boncore cast 36 yes-or-no votes on the 37 accountability roll calls in this file (16 yes, 20 no, one for a named candidate).

Roll calls on rules, audits, public records, term limits and pay
Date	Measure	Vote	Chamber result
January 26, 2017	Senate engrossment of the pay-raise bill	Yes	Yeas 31, nays 9
February 2, 2017	Amendment 2.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Matters considered in an informal session	Yes	Yeas 38, nays 0
February 2, 2017	Amendment 3.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Time to consider matters in an informal	Yes	Yeas 39, nays 0
February 2, 2017	Amendment 7.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Provided with text of bills prior to poll	Yes	Yeas 39, nays 0
February 2, 2017	Special orders by majority instead of two-thirds (contested meaning)	No	Yeas 6, nays 33
February 2, 2017	Amendment 11.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Unanimous consent	No	Yeas 6, nays 33
February 2, 2017	Amendment 13.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Timely Local Aid Notification	No	Yeas 7, nays 32
February 2, 2017	Senate override of the veto of the pay-raise bill	Yes	Yeas 31, nays 9
January 31, 2019	Amendment 1.1 (Bruce E. Tarr): Posting of Committee Roll Call Votes	Yes	Yeas 39, nays 0
January 31, 2019	Amendment 1.0 (Walter F. Timilty): Improving Access to Records	Yes	Yeas 39, nays 0
January 31, 2019	Amendment 2.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Informal Session	Yes	Yeas 39, nays 0
January 31, 2019	Amendment 3.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Conference Committee Report	No	Yeas 8, nays 31
January 31, 2019	Amendment 11.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Audit of accounts	Yes	Yeas 39, nays 0
not available	Joint rules (S9), rules package: question on acceptance of the report (contested meaning)	Yes	Yeas 39, nays 0
January 31, 2019	Amendment 1.0 (Diana DiZoglio): Non disclosure agreements	Yes	Yeas 39, nays 0
January 31, 2019	Amendment 7.1 (Rebecca L. Rausch): anti-harassment and assault	Yes	Yeas 39, nays 0
January 31, 2019	Amendment 5.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Numbers of bills considered at a hearing	No	Yeas 8, nays 31
January 31, 2019	Amendment 17.0 (Ryan C. Fattman): Matters considered in an informal session	No	Yeas 6, nays 33
January 31, 2019	Amendment 25.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Unanimous consent	No	Yeas 6, nays 33
not available	Senate rules (S8), rules package: question on acceptance of the report (contested meaning)	Yes	Yeas 39, nays 0
not available	Senate President election (contested meaning)	Voted for Karen E. Spilka	not available
February 11, 2021	Amendment 3.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Members receiving SWM GAA recommendation	No	Yeas 4, nays 35
February 11, 2021	Amendment 6.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Unanimous consent to go past midnight	No	Yeas 6, nays 34
February 11, 2021	Amendment 7.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Going past 10 pm	No	Yeas 6, nays 34
February 11, 2021	Amendment 8.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Successive formal sessions	No	Yeas 6, nays 34
February 11, 2021	Amendment 15.0 (Diana DiZoglio): Anti-harassment and bystander intervention training	No	Yeas 10, nays 29
February 11, 2021	Amendment 20.0 (Diana DiZoglio): Amendments to other appropriations bills	No	Yeas 5, nays 34
February 11, 2021	Accessibility; adopted 39-0 (contested meaning)	Yes	Yeas 39, nays 0
February 11, 2021	Supplier diversity; adopted 39-0 (contested meaning)	Yes	Yeas 39, nays 0
February 11, 2021	Amendment 42.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Consideration of further and redrafted amendments	No	Yeas 7, nays 32
February 11, 2021	Amendment 44.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Hearings	No	Yeas 6, nays 33
February 11, 2021	Amendment 49.0 (Ryan C. Fattman): Adoption amendment - Rule 24	No	Yeas 5, nays 34
February 11, 2021	Minority Leader appointments to committees (partisan allocation) (contested meaning)	No	Yeas 4, nays 35
February 11, 2021	Amendment 24.0 (Diana DiZoglio): Notice of legislative matters	No	Yeas 5, nays 34
February 11, 2021	Amendment 1.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): New items on the calendar	No	Yeas 5, nays 34
February 11, 2021	Amendment 1.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Filing of conference committee report	No	Yeas 6, nays 33
February 11, 2021	Amendment 14.0 (James B. Eldridge): Lengthening public notice period for legislative hearings	Yes	Yeas 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

Joseph A. Boncore’s committee reported $508,000 in contributions of $250 or more in years the member served, 2015–2021.

By year (years in the Legislature)
Year	Contributions
2015	$39,000
2016	$105,000
2017	$72,000
2018	$104,000
2019	$73,000
2020	$77,000
2021	$37,000

By kind of contributor
Kind	Total	Share
Individuals	$444,000	88%
Political committees and PACs	$55,000	11%
Unions and associations	$7,900	2%

Individuals’ money by the employer they reported
Employer reported	Share
A named employer	54%
Self-employed	23%
Retired	3%
Not employed	2%
Homemaker or at home	4%
Not reported or withheld	13%

Not counted as contributions: $37,000 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).

Largest employers and organizations
Employer or organization	Kind	Total	Contributions
JSB INDUSTRIES	individuals, by employer	$6,500	12
REDGATE	individuals, by employer	$6,250	7
MSA MORTGAGE	individuals, by employer	$5,500	8
CAPITOL WASTE SERVICES	individuals, by employer	$4,750	7
ORIGEN PROPERTY MANAGEMENT	individuals, by employer	$4,000	4
MASSPORT	individuals, by employer	$3,650	9
ACMT	individuals, by employer	$3,500	5
MILLENNIUM PARTNERS	individuals, by employer	$3,500	5
MK SERVICE	individuals, by employer	$3,500	4
TRINITY FINANCIAL	individuals, by employer	$3,250	8

Source: Office of Campaign and Political Finance, itemized receipts of $250 or more since 2015; OCPF filer record: Boncore Committee (CPF 16321). 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.