Senate · Democrat

William N. Brownsberger

Current member · Suffolk and Middlesex

Data through FY2026; built October 19, 2026.

Residence

Belmont

First elected

House 2006; Senate 2012 (special)

Seats held, General Courts 189–194 (the FY2017–FY2026 budgets)
Session	Chamber	District	Lines
189th (2015–16)	Senate	Second Suffolk and Middlesex	2011 lines
190th (2017–18)	Senate	Second Suffolk and Middlesex	2011 lines
191st (2019–20)	Senate	Second Suffolk and Middlesex	2011 lines
192nd (2021–22)	Senate	Second Suffolk and Middlesex	2011 lines
193rd (2023–24)	Senate	Suffolk and Middlesex	2021 lines
194th (2025–26)	Senate	Suffolk and Middlesex	2021 lines

Posts and stipends

William N. Brownsberger was paid $716,610 in leadership and committee stipends from 2016 to 2026 (2026 to date).

Posts and stipends by session (stipends by calendar year)
Session	Posts	First year	Second year
189th (2015–16)	Chair, Joint Committee on the Judiciary; Vice chair, Senate Committee on Ethics	not available	$7,500
190th (2017–18)	President Pro Tempore (from 2018)	$35,200	$35,200
191st (2019–20)	President Pro Tempore	$70,408	$70,408
192nd (2021–22)	President Pro Tempore	$73,851	$73,851
193rd (2023–24)	President Pro Tempore	$88,695	$88,695
194th (2025–26)	President Pro Tempore; Chair, Senate Committee on the Census	$97,201	$75,601 (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

Suffolk and Middlesex on its 2021 lines: 4 cities and towns, 183,947 residents (2020).

Boston 58%, 16% of the town · Watertown 19% · Belmont 15% · Cambridge 8%, 12% 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: 37 for all state aid and 31 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)	Second Suffolk and Middlesex	$518,000	$0	$2.79 · 27th of 40	$2.79 · 27th of 40
190th (2017–18)	Second Suffolk and Middlesex	$1.7M	$28,000	$4.62 · 15th of 40	$4.54 · 15th of 40
191st (2019–20)	Second Suffolk and Middlesex	$1.5M	$198,000	$4.12 · 21st of 40	$3.58 · 23rd of 40
192nd (2021–22)	Second Suffolk and Middlesex	$5.5M	$257,000	$14.85 · 2nd of 40	$14.16 · 1st of 40
193rd (2023–24)	Suffolk and Middlesex	$8.8M	$0	$23.97 · 2nd of 40	$23.97 · 2nd of 40
194th (2025–26)	Suffolk and Middlesex	$5M	$0	$26.95 · 4th of 40	$26.95 · 4th 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)	Second Suffolk and Middlesex	$956,000	$5.16 · 12th of 40	$956,000	$5.16 · 15th of 40
190th (2017–18)	Second Suffolk and Middlesex	$2.7M	$7.34 · 8th of 40	$2.7M	$7.38 · 8th of 40
191st (2019–20)	Second Suffolk and Middlesex	$4.9M	$13.16 · 5th of 40	$4.9M	$13.16 · 5th of 40
192nd (2021–22)	Second Suffolk and Middlesex	$11.5M	$31.11 · 3rd of 40	$14.6M	$39.25 · 2nd of 40
193rd (2023–24)	Suffolk and Middlesex	$14.3M	$38.93 · 3rd of 40	$20.4M	$55.46 · 2nd of 40
194th (2025–26)	Suffolk and Middlesex	$6.1M	$33.31 · 4th of 40	$9.4M	$50.93 · 4th of 40

Budget amendments

William N. Brownsberger sponsored 96 budget amendments in FY2017–FY2026, asking for $33.2 million in all.

Amendments sponsored

FY2017–FY2026 budgets

Adopted, known outcomes

54%

52 of 96

Chamber rate, same ask sizes

38%

expected at the chamber’s rates

Of the 96 with a known outcome, 52 were adopted (54%). At the chamber’s adoption rate for amendments of the same size, about 37 (38%) would have been.

Largest enacted items matched to an amendment William N. Brownsberger filed (strong text matches)
Year	Amount	Enacted budget text (excerpt)	Amendment
FY2025	$750,000	“the town of Belmont for environmental remediation and environmental compliance costs, including the cost of natural refrigerants and related capital…”	S4 #195
FY2026	$507,000	“erect fencing along the Birmingham parkway in the Brighton section of the city of Boston”	S3 #325
FY2017	$500,000	“school districts in which special education costs exceed 25 per cent of the total district costs and in which tuition and other circuit-breaker…”	S4 #142
FY2022	$475,000	“the executive office of health and human services, in collaboration with the executive office of public safety and security, to conduct a study of…”	S3 #420
FY2024	$400,000	“the recruitment, retention and compensation of kindergarten assistants in public schools in the town of Belmont”	S3 #621

Strong matches: 25 enacted items, $5.5 million (the member’s share where several amendments claim one clause).

For 16 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

William N. Brownsberger filed 257 bills as lead sponsor in these sessions; four were enacted on their own. In completed sessions, 2% of their lead bills were enacted on their own, against chamber medians of 1% 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	Enacted	Folded into an enacted bill	Sent to study	Reported favorably, then died	Reported adversely or withdrawn	No action	Pending (session open)	Enacted rate	Chamber median	Cosponsored
189th (2015–16)	Senate	48	0	2	30	9	0	7	0	0%	4%	140
190th (2017–18)	Senate	45	3	0	25	9	0	8	0	7%	3%	183
191st (2019–20)	Senate	63	1	2	34	22	4	0	0	2%	3%	184
192nd (2021–22)	Senate	45	0	0	26	12	2	5	0	0%	2%	11
193rd (2023–24)	Senate	23	0	0	9	12	0	2	0	0%	1%	14
194th (2025–26)	Senate	33	0	0	10	0	1	0	22	0%*	1%	24

Enacted bills as lead sponsor

S2127 (190th): An Act relative to the A-B-C Stormwater Flooding Board · Chapter 119 of the Acts of 2017
S2176 (190th): An Act establishing a sick leave bank for Elizabeth O'Brien, an employee of the Department of the Attorney General · Chapter 16 of the Acts of 2018
S771 (190th): An Act improving juror service · Chapter 435 of the Acts of 2018
S2437 (191st): An Act establishing a sick leave bank for Aurora Wilber, an employee of the Massachusetts Commission for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing · Chapter 15 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

William N. Brownsberger cast 68 yes-or-no votes on the 71 accountability roll calls in this file (26 yes, 42 no, three 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
not available	Senate President election (contested meaning)	Voted for Karen E. Spilka	not available
February 9, 2023	Amendment 1.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Successive Legislative Days	No	Yeas 4, nays 34
February 9, 2023	Amendment 2.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Time of recess for consideration of new matters	No	Yeas 5, nays 33
February 9, 2023	Amendment 5.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Going past 10 pm	No	Yeas 4, nays 34
February 9, 2023	Amendment 6.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Unanimous consent to go past midnight	No	Yeas 4, nays 34
February 9, 2023	Amendment 10.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Manner of how member voted	No	Yeas 5, nays 33
February 9, 2023	Amd 23 (Rodrigues) strikes Rule 11B, the 8-year term limit on the Senate President; adopted 32-6	Yes	Yeas 32, nays 6
February 9, 2023	Strike remote-participation rules 57C/57D (contested meaning)	No	Yeas 3, nays 35
February 9, 2023	Remote voting conditions (contested meaning)	No	Yeas 4, nays 34
February 9, 2023	Senate rules (S17), rules package: question on acceptance of the report (contested meaning)	Yes	Yeas 37, nays 1
February 9, 2023	Amendment 1.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Filing of Conference Committee Report	No	Yeas 4, nays 35
February 9, 2023	Amendment 12.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Adding a Minority Report	No	Yeas 3, nays 36
not available	Joint rules (S18), 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 12, 2025	Amendment 2.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Number of bills to be heard	No	Yeas 5, nays 33
February 12, 2025	Amendment 9.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Minority conference committee report	No	Yeas 6, nays 32
February 12, 2025	Amendment 10.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): 48 Hours for conference committee reports	No	Yeas 5, nays 33
February 12, 2025	Amendment 13.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Timeline for review of conference committee reports	No	Yeas 6, nays 32
February 12, 2025	Amendment 22.0 (John F. Keenan): Considering Conference Reports	No	Yeas 9, nays 29
February 12, 2025	Amendment 26.0 (John F. Keenan): Preventing Unjustified Financial Gain for Members and Their Familes	Yes	Yeas 38, nays 0
February 12, 2025	Amendment 29.0 (John F. Keenan): Limiting Joint Committee Extensions	No	Yeas 6, nays 32
not available	Joint rules (S15), rules package: question on passing the bill to be engrossed (contested meaning)	Yes	Yeas 39, nays 0
February 13, 2025	In-person voting conditions (contested meaning)	No	Yeas 5, nays 32
February 13, 2025	Amendment 36.0 (John F. Keenan): Continuing Beyond Midnight	No	Yeas 6, nays 31
February 13, 2025	Shorten period in which a matter can be laid on the table (dilatory motions) (contested meaning)	No	Yeas 5, nays 33
February 13, 2025	Amendment 10.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Going past 10PM	No	Yeas 6, nays 32
February 13, 2025	Amendment 19.0 (Ryan C. Fattman): Virtual vote designation	No	Yeas 6, nays 31
February 13, 2025	Legislative days for Rule 24 (dilatory motions) (contested meaning)	No	Yeas 6, nays 32
February 13, 2025	Senate rules (S19), rules package: question on acceptance of the report (contested meaning)	Yes	Yeas 39, nays 0
June 26, 2025	Joint rules (conference report) (S2545), rules package: question on acceptance of conference committee report (contested meaning)	Yes	Yeas 40, nays 0
May 28, 2026	S.3104 resolutions limiting the Senate's response to the Auditor to the SJC-defined 4 requests; no votes 5 Republicans + Montigny; contested (contested meaning)	Yes	Yeas 33, nays 6
July 30, 2026	Press shield amendment to S.3200; adopted 40-0; not about the Legislature's records (contested meaning)	Yes	Yeas 40, nays 0
July 30, 2026	Amd 18 (Tarr): apply the public records law to the General Court more fully	No	Yeas 6, nays 33
July 30, 2026	Senate passage of H.5469 34-6; no votes 5 Republicans + Montigny (too weak); contested (contested meaning)	Yes	Yeas 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

William N. Brownsberger’s committee reported $554,000 in contributions of $250 or more in years the member served, 2015–2026.

By year (years in the Legislature)
Year	Contributions
2015	$39,000
2016	$20,000
2017	$23,000
2018	$34,000
2019	$28,000
2020	$18,000
2021	$37,000
2022	$15,000
2023	$38,000
2024	$16,000
2025	$48,000
2026	$238,000

By kind of contributor
Kind	Total	Share
Individuals	$548,000	99%
Political committees and PACs	$5,600	1%
Unions and associations	$800	under 1%

Individuals’ money by the employer they reported
Employer reported	Share
A named employer	39%
Self-employed	16%
Retired	8%
Not employed	23%
Not reported or withheld	14%

Not counted as contributions: $116,000 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
CIVIL LIBERTIES LIST	individuals, by employer	$7,045	7
ANTHROPIC	individuals, by employer	$5,598	7
US CONGRESS	individuals, by employer	$5,000	5
BOYLSTON PROPERTIES	individuals, by employer	$5,000	5
MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL	individuals, by employer	$4,425	5
SASAKI ASSOCIATES	individuals, by employer	$4,100	10
BXP	individuals, by employer	$4,100	6
ENGLISHCENTRAL	individuals, by employer	$4,000	4
ANTHROPIC PBC	individuals, by employer	$3,643	4
MINTZ LEVIN	individuals, by employer	$3,000	4

Source: Office of Campaign and Political Finance, itemized receipts of $250 or more since 2015; OCPF filer record: Brownsberger Committee (CPF 14454). 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.