Commonwealth Report Legislators Method

Senate · Democrat

Vanna Howard

Current member · First Middlesex

Data through FY2026; built October 19, 2026.

Residence

Lowell

First elected

House 2020; Senate 2026 (special)

Seats held, General Courts 189–194 (the FY2017–FY2026 budgets)
SessionChamberDistrictLinesNote
192nd (2021–22)House17th Middlesex2011 lines
193rd (2023–24)House17th Middlesex2021 lines
194th (2025–26)House17th Middlesex2021 lines
194th (2025–26)SenateFirst Middlesex2021 linesmoved from the House to the Senate

Vanna Howard appears in both chambers in the 194th General Court: the seat changed during the session.

Posts and stipends

Vanna Howard was paid $15,239 in leadership and committee stipends in 2026 (2026 to date).

Posts and stipends by session (stipends by calendar year)
SessionPostsFirst yearSecond year
192nd (2021–22)No post recorded$0$0
193rd (2023–24)No post recorded$0$0
194th (2025–26)Chair, Joint Committee on Emergency Preparedness and Management; Vice Chair, Joint Higher Education$0$15,239 (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

First Middlesex on its 2021 lines: 5 cities and towns, 175,513 residents (2020).

Lowell · Dracut · Tyngsborough · Pepperell · Dunstable

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: 62 for all state aid and 47 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
192nd (2021–22)17th Middlesex$1M$0$11.18 · 28th of 160$11.18 · 24th of 160
193rd (2023–24)17th Middlesex$388,000$0$4.36 · 139th of 160$4.36 · 137th of 160
194th (2025–26)17th Middlesex$179,000$0$4.02 · 126th of 160$4.02 · 125th of 160
194th (2025–26)First Middlesex$1.1M$0$6.18 · 29th of 40$6.18 · 29th 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)
SessionDistrictPlaced in the districtPer resident per budget, rankEverything placedPer resident per budget, rank
192nd (2021–22)17th Middlesex$879,000$9.81 · 53rd of 160$1M$11.18 · 51st of 160
193rd (2023–24)17th Middlesex$381,000$4.29 · 146th of 160$388,000$4.36 · 148th of 160
194th (2025–26)17th Middlesex$304,000$6.84 · 96th of 160$304,000$6.84 · 103rd of 160
194th (2025–26)First Middlesex$1.5M$8.32 · 23rd of 40$1.5M$8.32 · 28th of 40

Budget amendments

Vanna Howard sponsored 57 budget amendments in FY2017–FY2026, asking for $170 million in all.

Amendments sponsored

57

FY2017–FY2026 budgets

Adopted, known outcomes

34%

16 of 47

Chamber rate, same ask sizes

62%

expected at the chamber’s rates

Of the 47 with a known outcome, 16 were adopted (34%). At the chamber’s adoption rate for amendments of the same size, about 29 (62%) would have been.

Largest enacted items matched to an amendment Vanna Howard filed (strong text matches)
YearAmountEnacted budget text (excerpt)Amendment
FY2026$200,000“the operation of the SMART and Eureka programs at the Framingham, Holyoke, Lowell, Lynn, Pittsfield and Worcester chapters of Girls Inc”H4000 #1180
FY2025$100,000“the Project Pop Up markets to transform vacant storefronts into a dynamic retail incubator”H4600 #524
FY2026$50,000“renovations to Oliveria and Rotary parks and the McInerney playground in the city of Lowell to equitably contribute to the health, well-being and…”H4000 #631
FY2026$50,000“the town of Tewksbury for sidewalk improvements on the Whipple road corridor to ensure the accessibility and safety of pedestrians”H4000 #632
FY2026$50,000“the Lowell Community Health Center, Inc.’s residency program for primary care doctors in the city of Lowell to be used for housing stipends for…”H4000 #646

Strong matches: 12 enacted items, $715,000 (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.

44 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

Vanna Howard filed 38 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 3% 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
SessionChamberLead billsSent to studyReported favorably, then diedNo actionPending (session open)Enacted rateChamber medianCosponsored
192nd (2021–22)House330000%3%493
193rd (2023–24)House17106100%4%925
194th (2025–26)Senate500050%*1%9
194th (2025–26)House1340090%*1%564

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

Vanna Howard cast 38 yes-or-no votes on the 38 accountability roll calls in this file (11 yes, 27 no).

Roll calls on rules, audits, public records, term limits and pay
DateMeasureVoteChamber result
February 24, 2021Amendment 8.0 (Erika Uyterhoeven): Public Committee Votes and TestimonyNoYeas 36, nays 122
February 24, 2021Amendment 3.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Electronic PollNoYeas 38, nays 121
February 24, 2021Amendment 6.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Procurement AmendmentNoYeas 34, nays 125
February 24, 2021Amendment 11.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Conference Committee ReportNoYeas 35, nays 123
February 24, 2021Joint rules (H68), rules package: on adoption of the Order (contested meaning)YesYeas 128, nays 31
July 7, 2021Remote voting for members on military duty; adopted 160-0 (contested meaning)YesYeas 160, nays 0
July 7, 2021Amendment 2.0 (Tami L. Gouveia): Speaker Term LimitsNoYeas 35, nays 125
July 7, 2021Amendment 6.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Emergency Scheduling of HearingsNoYeas 30, nays 129
July 7, 2021Amendment 9.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Committee Polls - 2 HoursNoYeas 35, nays 124
July 7, 2021Amendment 11.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Access to InformationNoYeas 33, nays 126
July 7, 2021Amendment 13.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Review of Consolidated AmendmentsNoYeas 32, nays 127
July 7, 2021Amendment 12.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Committee Votes on WebsiteNoYeas 38, nays 121
July 7, 2021Amendment 16.0 (Erika Uyterhoeven): Public Committee VotesNoYeas 41, nays 117
July 7, 2021Amendment 3.0 (Christopher M. Markey): Review Period for Released BillsNoYeas 39, nays 119
July 7, 2021House rules (H3930), rules package: on adoption of the order (contested meaning)YesYeas 129, nays 29
February 1, 2023Amendment 7.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Time to review technical/ perfecting amendmentsNoYeas 23, nays 130
February 1, 2023Amendment 12.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Review of Consolidated AmendmentsNoYeas 23, nays 130
February 1, 2023House rules (H2023), rules package: on adoption of the order (contested meaning)YesYeas 153, nays 0
February 1, 2023Amendment 3.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Local Aid ResolutionNoYeas 23, nays 130
February 1, 2023Amendment 9.0 (Bradley H. Jones, Jr.): Hearing ScheduleNoYeas 24, nays 129
February 1, 2023Joint rules (H2025), rules package: on adoption of the order (contested meaning)YesYeas 153, nays 0
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
May 28, 2026S.3104 resolutions limiting the Senate's response to the Auditor to the SJC-defined 4 requests; no votes 5 Republicans + Montigny; contested (contested meaning)YesYeas 33, nays 6
July 30, 2026Press shield amendment to S.3200; adopted 40-0; not about the Legislature's records (contested meaning)YesYeas 40, nays 0
July 30, 2026Amd 18 (Tarr): apply the public records law to the General Court more fullyNoYeas 6, nays 33
July 30, 2026Senate passage of H.5469 34-6; no votes 5 Republicans + Montigny (too weak); contested (contested meaning)YesYeas 34, nays 6

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

Vanna Howard’s committee reported $109,000 in contributions of $250 or more in years the member served, 2021–2026.

By year (years in the Legislature)
YearContributions
2021$2,000
2022$17,000
2023$7,800
2024$11,000
2025$34,000
2026$37,000
By kind of contributor
KindTotalShare
Individuals$102,00094%
Political committees and PACs$6,2506%
Unions and associations$500under 1%
Individuals’ money by the employer they reported
Employer reportedShare
A named employer38%
Self-employed23%
Retired6%
Not employed22%
Not reported or withheld11%

Not counted as contributions: $6,987 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 $20,000 in years the member was not in the Legislature (2020), for example while running for another office. Those receipts are not in the totals above.

Largest employers and organizations
Employer or organizationKindTotalContributions
AIRBNBindividuals, by employer$2,5007
WISH PROJECTindividuals, by employer$2,5006
MA & NORTHERN NE LABORERS' DISTRICT COUNCIL POL ACTION COMMcommittee or PAC$2,0004
TMI MANAGEMENTindividuals, by employer$1,7504
MASSACHUSETTS DENTAL SOCIETY POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEEcommittee or PAC$1,5003
UMASS LOWELLindividuals, by employer$1,5006
TEMO 360individuals, by employer$1,5004
SETRA SYSTEMSindividuals, by employer$1,4002
TRINITY EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICEindividuals, by employer$1,3505
LOWELL PUBLIC SCHOOLSindividuals, by employer$1,0004

Source: Office of Campaign and Political Finance, itemized receipts of $250 or more since 2015; OCPF filer record: Howard Committee (CPF 17499). 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.