[CAPTURE PORTAL] 119TH CONGRESS

// Legislative Integrity Monitor

Goblin House Intelligence

Richard E. Neal

Democratic · Representative, MA ·1

Score Components

4 LOW

Connection Density 20%

0 → 0

Donor Influence 10%

0 → 0

Silence Risk 25%

0 → 0

Contradiction Risk 25%

0 → 0

Intelligence Volume 10%

42 → 4

Constituency Deviation 5%

0 → 0

Voting Misalignment 5%

0 → 0

% = weight in composite score · Raw component 0–100 × weight = weighted contribution (→) · Sum of contributions = overall score. Hover a row for details.

[constituency_baseline] Demographic anchor: Bachelor's degree or higher: 36.8%

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Demographic anchor: Hispanic or Latino (of any race): 21.3%

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Demographic anchor: Persons in poverty: 13.4%

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Demographic anchor: Median household income (2022 5-year ACS): $71,518

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Ballot measure: Question 1 — Millionaire's Tax (Fair Share Amendment) (2022) — passed, margin 52.0% to 48.0% statewide

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Dominant industry: NAICS 31-33 (share 0.1)

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Dominant industry: NAICS 44-45 (share 0.11)

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Dominant industry: NAICS 61 (share 0.12)

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Dominant industry: NAICS 62 (share 0.18)

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Top employer: MassMutual (7000 employees)

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Top employer: University of Massachusetts Amherst (7500 employees)

secondary

[constituency_baseline] Top employer: Baystate Health (12000 employees)

secondary

[constituency_baseline] District summary: Massachusetts's 1st District spans the largely rural western portion of the state, anchored by the Springfield metropolitan area in the south and the Berkshires in the northwest. The district has sharp economic disparity: Springfield and Holyoke are among the poorest mid-sized cities in New England with poverty rates

secondary

Voted yea_unverified on H.R. 5376 (Build Back Better Act) on 2021-11-19: Donor pressure: Real estate and financial services sectors rank among Neal's top-5 career donor industries and are the primary beneficiaries of the SALT deduction cap increase to $80,000 that Neal personally insisted on during negotiations; the National Association of Realtors lobbied h

inferential · 2021-11-19

Voted yea_unverified on H.R. 4444 (U.S.-China Relations Act of 2000 (Permanent Normal Trade Relations)) on 2000-05-24: Neal voted to grant China permanent normal trade relations over the explicit opposition of labor unions in his district. Western Massachusetts had already lost thousands of manufacturing jobs to trade competition in the 1980s and 1990s; the

inferential · 2000-05-24

Pharmaceuticals/Health Products industry is a top-ten career donor sector, relevant to Neal's role shaping drug-pricing legislation including H.R. 3 (Lower Drug Costs Now Act) during his Ways and Means chairmanship.

secondary · 2024-12-31

Real Estate industry ranks among the top five career donor sectors — a sector that is the primary direct beneficiary of Neal's signature legislative priority to raise or eliminate the SALT deduction cap, which sustains higher home values in high-tax-state markets.

secondary · 2024-12-31

Securities & Investment industry ranks among the top three career donor sectors, reflecting Neal's tax-writing role affecting capital gains rates, carried interest treatment, and financial-sector taxation across multiple Congresses.

secondary · 2024-12-31

Insurance industry is the top career donor sector to Neal, consistent with his Ways and Means Committee jurisdiction over health care tax treatment and Medicare Advantage reimbursement policy. Sector totals are compiled from FEC filings with OpenSecrets editorial categorization.

secondary · 2024-12-31

No connections mapped

Bill	Vote	Date	Alignment
Build Back Better Act	yea_unverified	2021-11-19	mixed
U.S.-China Relations Act of 2000 (Permanent Normal Trade Relations)	yea_unverified	2000-05-24	misaligned

Last contradiction analysis: Never

No contradictions detected

Last silence detection: Never

No active silences

No donor interests mapped

No constituency baseline modelled

No platform commitments archived

No committee memberships recorded

Scoring Methodology

The Capture Risk Score is a composite 0–100 index measuring potential regulatory capture of elected officials. It is computed from seven weighted components:

Component	Weight	Signal
Silence Risk	25%	Topics where donors have interests but the official is silent
Contradiction Risk	25%	Stated positions contradicted by voting record (recent findings boosted)
Connection Density	20%	Mapped relationships to lobbyists, contractors, interest groups
Intelligence Volume	10%	Documented facts from verified sources (logarithmic scale)
Donor Influence	10%	Distinct donors with interests overlapping committee jurisdiction
Constituency Deviation	5%	Gap between district priorities and legislative focus
Voting Misalignment	5%	Floor votes contradicting stated platform positions

Each component produces a raw score 0–100. The weighted sum yields the overall score. Tier thresholds: Critical ≥ 45, High ≥ 36, Elevated ≥ 22, Moderate ≥ 10, Low < 10.

Officials without at least 2 documented facts, 1 contradiction analysis, 1 voting record, or 1 constituency baseline are marked Insufficient Evidence and excluded from numeric ranking.

Contradiction findings from the last 180 days receive a recency boost. High-severity contradictions (score ≥ 70) receive additional weight.

Full methodology: /congress/methodology

View Full Entity Profile →