Commonwealth Report Legislators Method

House · Democrat

Thomas W. Moakley

Current member · Barnstable, Dukes and Nantucket

Data through FY2026; built October 19, 2026.

Residence

Falmouth

First elected

House 2024

Seats held, General Courts 189–194 (the FY2017–FY2026 budgets)
SessionChamberDistrictLinesNote
194th (2025–26)HouseBarnstable, Dukes and Nantucket2021 lines

Posts and stipends

No stipend payments to Thomas W. Moakley are recorded for 2016–2026.

Posts and stipends by session (stipends by calendar year)
SessionPostsFirst yearSecond year
194th (2025–26)No post recorded$0$0 (to date)

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

Barnstable, Dukes and Nantucket on its 2021 lines: 9 cities and towns, 45,798 residents (2020).

Nantucket · Falmouth · Oak Bluffs · Edgartown · Tisbury · West Tisbury · Chilmark · Aquinnah · Gosnold

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 51 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
194th (2025–26)Barnstable, Dukes and Nantucket$298,000$0$6.50 · 85th of 160$6.50 · 82nd 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
194th (2025–26)Barnstable, Dukes and Nantucket$318,000$6.94 · 92nd of 160$318,000$6.94 · 99th of 160

Budget amendments

Thomas W. Moakley sponsored nine budget amendments in FY2017–FY2026, asking for $510,000 in all.

Amendments sponsored

9

FY2017–FY2026 budgets

Adopted, known outcomes

50%

3 of 6

Chamber rate, same ask sizes

64%

expected at the chamber’s rates

Of the six with a known outcome, three were adopted (50%). At the chamber’s adoption rate for amendments of the same size, about four (64%) would have been.

Largest enacted items matched to an amendment Thomas W. Moakley filed (strong text matches)
YearAmountEnacted budget text (excerpt)Amendment
FY2026$70,000“Island Elderly Housing, Inc., for the purpose of emergency preparedness”H4000 #1054
FY2026$15,000“the Woods Hole Film Festival for operations and programming”H4000 #1053

Strong matches: 2 enacted items, $85,000 (the member’s share where several amendments claim one clause). House attribution is inferred throughout, because the House adopts most amendments inside consolidated amendments.

6 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

Thomas W. Moakley filed 29 bills as lead sponsor in these sessions; four were enacted on their own. Only the 194th General Court, still in session, is covered, so no enacted rate is given.

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 billLaid before the Governor (pending)Sent to studyPending (session open)Enacted rateChamber medianCosponsored
194th (2025–26)House2941141914%*1%114

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

Thomas W. Moakley cast 14 yes-or-no votes on the 14 accountability roll calls in this file (four yes, ten no).

Roll calls on rules, audits, public records, term limits and pay
DateMeasureVoteChamber result
February 25, 2025Amendment 2.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Roll CallsNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025Amendment 3.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Formal Session NotificationNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025Amendment 4.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): General Court AuditsNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025Amendment 5.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Opinion of the JusticesNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025Amendment 6.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Committee PollsNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025Amendment 7.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Committee Poll NotificationNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025Joint rules (H2026), rules package: on adoption of the order (contested meaning)YesYeas 128, nays 23
February 25, 2025Amendment 18.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Time to Review LegislationNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025Amendment 17.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Audit by State AuditorNoYeas 24, nays 127
February 25, 2025Amendment 2.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Committee PollsNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025Amendment 3.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Committee Poll NotificationsNoYeas 23, nays 128
February 25, 2025House rules (H2024), rules package: on adoption of the order (contested meaning)YesYeas 128, nays 23
June 26, 2025Joint rules (conference report) (S2545), rules package: on acceptance (contested meaning)YesYeas 147, nays 2
June 3, 2026Engross H.5469 (public records law applied to the Legislature). Reform advocates split (contested meaning)YesYeas 125, nays 28

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

Thomas W. Moakley’s committee reported $61,000 in contributions of $250 or more in years the member served, 2025–2026.

By year (years in the Legislature)
YearContributions
2025$37,000
2026$24,000
By kind of contributor
KindTotalShare
Individuals$55,00090%
Political committees and PACs$4,2507%
Unions and associations$1,8003%
Individuals’ money by the employer they reported
Employer reportedShare
A named employer40%
Self-employed23%
Retired5%
Not employed31%
Not reported or withheld2%

Not counted as contributions: $400 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 $88,000 in years the member was not in the Legislature (2019, 2020, 2024), for example while running for another office. Those receipts are not in the totals above.

Largest employers and organizations
Employer or organizationKindTotalContributions
MCCARRON MURPHY AND VUKOTAindividuals, by employer$2,5003
PCSDindividuals, by employer$2,0004
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTSindividuals, by employer$1,8004
GRAZING FIELDS FARMindividuals, by employer$1,5503
MA & NORTHERN NE LABORERS' DISTRICT COUNCIL POL ACTION COMMcommittee or PAC$1,0002
MASSACHUSETTS BRICK LAYERS PEOPLE'S COMMITTEEcommittee or PAC$1,0002
BROOKLYN DEFENDER SERVICESindividuals, by employer$1,0001
MBLindividuals, by employer$1,0002
NORTHEAST ENGINEERINGindividuals, by employer$1,0001
FIDELITY INVESTMENTSindividuals, by employer$1,0001

Source: Office of Campaign and Political Finance, itemized receipts of $250 or more since 2015; OCPF filer record: Moakley Committee (CPF 17401). 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.