UPDATED 10/4/24 5:34PM: To note Matthews-Kane raised $12,641 in September and ended the month with $30,129 cash on hand. Pease raised $5,543 that month and entered October with $12,902 in the bank.

GOP Rep Pease, the incumbent, has fallen his Democratic Challenger Councilor Matthews-Kane. (via Facebook/Matthews-Kane campaign & Pease official)

With primary season concluding early this month, attention is now turning to the general election in Massachusetts. However, the commonwealth’s western end has few competitive general election contests. Some contests do not even feature candidates from both major parties. One exception is the 4^th Hampden House district, where the Democratic challenger has quietly outraised the GOP incumbent.

Democrat Bridget Matthews-Kane, the Westfield City Councilor for Ward 3, had entered the race with an unusual asset for a challenge to a sitting state rep: money. She was able to transfer five grand from her municipal account, which put her at about parity with Republican Rep Kelly Pease. She has leapt ahead of him in the fundraising race since.

From April, the month Matthews-Kane began filing with the Office of Campaign & Political Finance, Matthews-Kane has raised $30,348 to Pease’s $16,500. Pease had raised a small amount before she filed and both candidates have lent themselves additional money.

Aside from surprise primary challenges in Springfield and an open seat in the Berkshires, primary season in the 413 was quiet. Even an open rep seat in Hampshire County drew no contest—Easthampton City Council President Homar Gomez won the primary unopposed and has no general election opponent.

The general will not be much more exciting in the west. Becket Senator Paul Mark, a Democrat, and Sutton Senator Ryan Fattman, a Republican whose district stretches into Monson, do face challengers from the party opposite. The opponents face very steep climbs.

Independent Marybeth Mitts will face Leigh Davis, the Democrat nominated to succeed retiring Lenox Rep William “Smitty” Pignatelli. However, the uber-Democratic nature of the district and high turnout in the presidential contest will benefit Davis. Democratic US Rep Richard Neal will likely receive a similar boost against the challenge from independent Nadia Milleron.

Eternally perennial candidate Bob Collamore, running as an independent, is challenging Democratic Hampden Register of Deeds Cheryl Coakley-Rivera. Absent divine intervention, Coakley-Rivera will take the oath again in January.

The 4th Hampden, now with a nibble taken out of Westfield, but topped with Southampton. Could that affect the race? (via malegislature.gov)

That leaves the 4^th Hampden. Once consisting of only the whole of Westfield, after the 2020 Census, legislators excised some Westfield precincts and bolted Southampton onto the district. Southampton is ardently Democratic, but so too were the removed Whip City precincts.

Westfield itself has voted for Democratic presidential candidates since 1988 save, notably, 2016. However, Republicans have held the 4^th Hampden for decades, excluding the John Velis interlude from 2014 until his election to the State Senate in 2020.

From a campaign finance point of view, Matthews-Kane has the means to get to Beacon Hill. Fundraising is not destiny, but it can fund a well-tuned mail and online program worth a few points.

By any measure, Matthews-Kane has outraised Pease through the end of August, the last month for which complete records were available. Incomplete data for September had shown Matthews-Kane ahead even without the $5,000 she lent her campaign this month. Final numbers filed in October confirmed her edge. Pease’s campaign loan, also $5,000, came in March.

Matthews-Kane filed with the Westfield City Clerk’s office until she became a candidate for the Massachusetts House. The amount she transferred to her state account in March, $5,766, is the same amount she reported to the city clerk at the end of 2023. In January, prior to forming a state campaign committee in April, she reported $858 in expenses, including a loan repayment to herself and $375 for the email platform she uses for her constituent newsletter.

Pease entered 2024 with $5,455 and raised $550 in the three months before Matthews-Kane opened her OCPF account. He spent $2,602 in this period, at least half of which went to local sponsorships such as for St. Patrick’s Day parade activities. The rest went to campaign expenses, including constituent databasing, supplies and media. He lent himself $5,000 in March.

Incumbents usually do not want for resources, though Pease has not wasted what he has either. (via Facebook/Pease official)

When April began, Pease had $8,403 in the bank, while Matthews-Kane, after her ostensible municipal expenses, $4,858.

Between April 1 and August 31, Pease raised $11,091 and spent $7,192. His expenditures were a mix of online and newspaper ads, supplies, food, media services and fees for WinRed, the GOP’s candidate fundraising platform. Pease entered August with $12,902 and has raised at least $5,420 in September according to incomplete data. Pease’s September report is a few dollars more than this—the cause of the discrepancy is not immediately apparent, but not necessarily significant. His true fundraising haul in his report was $5,358 due to WinRed fees.

Matthews-Kane raised $22,572 from April 1 to August 31. Her expenses in that time were $6,254, leaving her with $21,190 going into September. Matthews-Kane’s expenses consisted of mostly printing, digital/email services, food and event space, and fees for ActBlue, the Democrats’ fundraising platform. Matthews-Kane’s largest expense was $1,500 for access to the state party’s voter database. She raised $12,776 per available September data, although this includes her $5,000 loan to herself. The final figure came in lower due to fees for ActBlue.

Final September figures filed in October confirmed Matthews-Kane raised over $2,000 more than Pease in September reports and she had over twice as much cash on hand. Matthews-Kane began October with $30,129 to Pease’s $12,902.

Both candidates can boast a range of donation sizes as well as support from their local party committees. Pols past and present from Southampton and Westfield—and few from beyond—gave either via their personal or campaign accounts.

The Massachusetts & Northern New England Laborers’ Council gave $500 to Pease—although this was before Matthews-Kane filed for the seat. The United Food & Commercial Workers, Local 1459 gave her $500.

So far, no television or radio station has filed ad purchase records with the Federal Communications Commission. However, both candidates could afford the region’s cheap rates.

Just since her June kickoff, Matthews-Kane has racked up nearly 19 large. (WMP&I)

Matthews-Kane’s money advantage may not swing the race. Still, it is an unusual position to be in for a challenger to an incumbent in this district.

Republicans will not let the seat go quietly. Indeed, the push to make Pease the nominee in 2020 reflected some pragmatism for the local GOP. In office, he has played up his work on nonpartisan issues like PFAS contamination.

Yet, Democrats are watching the seat, too. The 4^th Hampden had long been a white whale for the party. Losing the seat, albeit amid the chaos of the pandemic, undoubtedly stung.

Southampton Democrats will be especially eager to trade out Pease after redistricting took them out Northampton Rep Lindsay Sabadosa’s district. They and Whip City Dems have a candidate running on her Council record. Just as importantly, she’s running with the resources needed to win.