House · Democrat

RoseLee Vincent

Former member, served 2015–2020 in the sessions covered here · 16th Suffolk

Data through FY2026; built October 19, 2026.

Residence

Revere

First elected

House 2014 (special)

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	16th Suffolk	2011 lines
190th (2017–18)	House	16th Suffolk	2011 lines
191st (2019–20)	House	16th Suffolk	2011 lines

Posts and stipends

RoseLee Vincent was paid $42,896 in leadership and committee stipends from 2017 to 2020.

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)	Vice chair, Joint Committee on Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture	$5,200	$5,200
191st (2019–20)	Vice chair, House Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets	$16,248	$16,248

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

16th Suffolk on its 2011 lines: 3 cities and towns, 50,034 residents (2020).

Revere 68%, 55% of the town · Chelsea 21%, 26% of the town · Saugus 11%, 19% 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: 63 for all state aid and 50 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)	16th Suffolk	$172,000	$13,000	$3.44 · 63rd of 160	$3.18 · 66th of 160
190th (2017–18)	16th Suffolk	$382,000	$9,710	$3.82 · 88th of 160	$3.72 · 90th of 160
191st (2019–20)	16th Suffolk	$474,000	$0	$4.74 · 56th of 160	$4.74 · 53rd 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)	16th Suffolk	$49,000	$0.98 · 136th of 160	$172,000	$3.44 · 82nd of 160
190th (2017–18)	16th Suffolk	$136,000	$1.36 · 155th of 160	$382,000	$3.82 · 100th of 160
191st (2019–20)	16th Suffolk	$281,000	$2.81 · 124th of 160	$474,000	$4.74 · 86th of 160

Budget amendments

RoseLee Vincent sponsored 42 budget amendments in FY2017–FY2026, asking for $11.4 million in all.

Amendments sponsored

FY2017–FY2026 budgets

Adopted, known outcomes

61%

22 of 36

Chamber rate, same ask sizes

55%

expected at the chamber’s rates

Of the 36 with a known outcome, 22 were adopted (61%). At the chamber’s adoption rate for amendments of the same size, about 20 (55%) would have been.

Largest enacted items matched to an amendment RoseLee Vincent filed (strong text matches)
Year	Amount	Enacted budget text (excerpt)	Amendment
FY2021	$1M	“the payroll costs of the state police directed patrols”	H5150 #126
FY2020	$1M	“the payroll costs of the state police directed patrols”	H3800 #1122
FY2019	$1M	“the payroll costs of the state police directed patrols”	H4400 #726
FY2018	$515,000 (shared two ways)	“the payroll costs of the state police directed patrols”	H3600 #654
FY2017	$515,000 (shared two ways)	“the payroll costs of state police-directed patrols”	H4200 #384

Strong matches: 14 enacted items, $5.2 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. House attribution is inferred throughout, because the House adopts most amendments inside consolidated amendments.

34 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

RoseLee Vincent filed 82 bills as lead sponsor in these sessions; 11 were enacted on their own. In completed sessions, 13% 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	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)	House	23	4	0	15	4	0	0	17%	6%	82
190th (2017–18)	House	32	7	3	15	5	1	1	22%	7%	98
191st (2019–20)	House	27	0	0	15	7	0	5	0%	4%	171

Enacted bills as lead sponsor

H3173 (189th): An act relative to the removal of commemorative flag holders from the graves of veterans and certain police and fire personnel. · Chapter 131 of the Acts of 2015
H3185 (189th): An Act establishing a sick leave bank for Joseph Esposito, an employee of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation · Chapter 22 of the Acts of 2015
H3900 (189th): An Act establishing a sick leave bank for Janaina Euriques, an employee of the Department of Children and Families · Chapter 30 of the Acts of 2016
H4267 (189th): An Act establishing a sick leave bank for Rick Freni, an employee of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation · Chapter 139 of the Acts of 2016
H208 (190th): An Act relative to simulcasting and racing · Chapter 56 of the Acts of 2017
H3874 (190th): An Act eliminating the preliminary election in the City of Revere in 2017 · Chapter 74 of the Acts of 2017
H3876 (190th): An Act authorizing the city of Revere to pay a certain sum of money · Chapter 129 of the Acts of 2017
H3964 (190th): An Act relative to Creating a Plaque at the Cronin Rink in Revere in Honor of Roger Naples · Chapter 159 of the Acts of 2017
H4458 (190th): An Act relative to Water Meter Ordinance Violations – Penalties And Liens in the City of Revere · Chapter 243 of the Acts of 2018
H4845 (190th): An Act establishing a sick leave bank for Diane Misiano, an employee of the Department of Revenue · Chapter 239 of the Acts of 2018
H4997 (190th): An Act establishing a sick leave bank for Michael Hooton, an employee of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation · Chapter 399 of the Acts of 2018

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

RoseLee Vincent cast 46 yes-or-no votes on the 46 accountability roll calls in this file (seven yes, 39 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)	Yes	Yeas 116, nays 44
January 26, 2017	Enactment of the pay-raise bill	Yes	Yeas 116, nays 43
February 2, 2017	Override of Gov. Baker's veto of the pay-raise bill	Yes	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	No	Yeas 55, nays 103
January 30, 2019	Amendment 2.0 (Jonathan Hecht): Time to review amendments	No	Yeas 47, nays 111
January 30, 2019	Amendment 3.0 (Jonathan Hecht): Committee materials and votes	No	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	No	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	No	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	No	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	No	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)	No	Yeas 11, nays 146
January 30, 2019	Amendment 38.0 (Denise Provost): To assure adequate time to prepare and file amendments	No	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	No	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

RoseLee Vincent’s committee reported $32,000 in contributions of $250 or more in years the member served, 2015–2020.

By year (years in the Legislature)
Year	Contributions
2015	$11,000
2016	$5,900
2017	$3,150
2018	$7,850
2019	$3,150
2020	$500

By kind of contributor
Kind	Total	Share
Individuals	$15,000	47%
Political committees and PACs	$12,000	37%
Unions and associations	$5,100	16%

Individuals’ money by the employer they reported
Employer reported	Share
A named employer	66%
Self-employed	17%
Retired	9%
Homemaker or at home	7%
Not reported or withheld	2%

Largest employers and organizations
Employer or organization	Kind	Total	Contributions
BLACKBAUD	individuals, by employer	$2,000	2
NEW ENGLAND ICE CREAM	individuals, by employer	$2,000	2
RETIRED PUBLIC EMPLOYEES PAC	committee or PAC	$1,500	5
MA & NORTHERN NE LABORERS' DISTRICT COUNCIL POL ACTION COMM	committee or PAC	$1,500	3
MA CORRECTION OFFICERS FEDERATED UNION PAC M C O F U PAC	committee or PAC	$1,400	4
RUSS REID	individuals, by employer	$1,000	1
MA & NO NEW ENGLAND LABORERS' DISTRICT COUNCIL	union or association	$1,000	2
PROFESSIONAL FIRE FIGHTERS OF MASSACHUSETTS	union or association	$1,000	3
PROFESSIONAL FIRE FIGHTERS OF MA PEOPLE'S CTTEE	committee or PAC	$1,000	2
HYM INVESTMENT GROUP	individuals, by employer	$1,000	1

Source: Office of Campaign and Political Finance, itemized receipts of $250 or more since 2015; OCPF filer record: Vincent Committee (CPF 15755). 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.