← Back to All Bills

HB1171 Relative to eviction safeguards for tenants whose Social Security payments are disrupted.

Housing In Committee Auto-scored

Relative to eviction safeguards for tenants whose Social Security payments are disrupted.

Impact Score — How Does This Bill Affect You?

3

Overall Impact Score

Harmful

Scale: 1 (harmful) to 10 (beneficial)

3
💰

Your Wallet

Killing this bill means elderly and disabled tenants facing Social Security disruptions have no protection against eviction costs, security deposits, moving expenses, and potential homelessness.

2
🏘️

Your Community

Allowing eviction of elderly and disabled people because of government payment system failures is profoundly harmful. These are among the most vulnerable community members.

3
⚖️

Your Freedom

Tenants can be punished for circumstances entirely beyond their control, with no legal protection against losing their homes due to bureaucratic delays.

Status

Minority Committee Report: Ought to Pass with Amendment # 2026-0466h (NT)

Voted Yes

0 R

Voted No

0 R

R Yes D Yes R No D No

Sponsor

Teresa O'Rorke (D)

The Short Version

Would have protected tenants from eviction when their Social Security payments are disrupted through no fault of their own. Killed 186-155 (ITL). This means elderly and disabled tenants who rely on Social Security can still be evicted during government payment disruptions they cannot control.

Who's Behind This Bill?

Who Benefits

  • ▲ Landlords who can proceed with evictions regardless of Social Security disruptions

Who Pays the Price

  • ▼ Elderly tenants on Social Security
  • ▼ Disabled tenants relying on SSDI
  • ▼ Homeless services that must absorb displaced seniors

Roll Call Detail (1 vote)

Every recorded floor vote on this bill, with each legislator's individual vote. Click a name to see that rep's full record.

Who actually supports this bill?

Across the 1 recorded vote on this bill — counting each legislator's net direction and treating kill motions as opposing the bill — Republicans opposed it ( 1 for , 184 against ) , and Democrats supported it ( 154 for , 2 against ) .

"Supporting" means voting for passage OR voting against a kill motion. "Opposing" is the inverse. Concurs and amendment-only votes don't count.

Inexpedient to Legislate (kill motion) 2026-03-12
Passed

YES = Kill the bill. NO = Keep the bill alive.

184R + 2D
Voted to Kill the Bill (186)
1R + 154D
Voted to Keep It Alive (155)
29
Absent
22
Not voting
Show all 392 individual votes

Voted Yea (186)

Republicans (184)
Democrats (2)

Voted Nay (155)

Republicans (1)
Democrats (154)
Absent (29)

Brian Seaworth (R) , Dale Swanson (D) , Donald McFarlane (R) , Efstathia Booras (D) , Gaby Grossman (D) , Geoff Smith (D) , Jaci Grote (D) , James Spillane (R) , Jay Markell (R) , Jeanine Notter (R) , Jennifer Rhodes (R) , Jess Edwards (R) , Jim Fedolfi (R) , John Janigian (R) , Jonathan Smith (R) , Joseph Hamblen (R) , Kimberly Rice (R) , Linda Haskins (D) , Lorie Ball (R) , Mark Warden (R) , Mary Ford (R) , Matthew Hicks (D) , Patricia Cornell (D) , Peter Lovett (D) , Peter Varney (R) , Robert Harb (R) , Russell Muirhead (D) , Susan Vandecasteele (R) , Thomas Buco (D)

Read the Actual Bill → See All Bills

Bill statuses as of May 2026. Check LegiScan or NH General Court for the latest.

This bill was auto-scored using AI analysis of the bill text and legislative data. Scores may be refined as we review more bills.