PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 10, 2025
Reforming and Enhancing Sustainable Updates to Laboratory Testing Services Act of 2025 or the RESULTS Act
This bill requires the use of particular data from the private sector to inform Medicare payment rates for certain widely available laboratory tests.
Specifically, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) must contract with an entity that maintains a database of claims data for clinical diagnostic laboratory tests that (1) are not advanced diagnostic tests, and (2) were furnished by more than 100 providers and suppliers of such services over a specified six-month period (i.e., widely available tests).
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The database must meet specified requirements, such as having data that is representative of the entire country and from more than 50 private payors and claims administrators. The contracted entity must be a nonprofit entity that is not affiliated with any government agency, any insurance issuer or provider, or any other organization in the health care sector.
Beginning January 1, 2028, the CMS must use the information obtained from the database to inform Medicare payment rates for these widely available laboratory tests.
The bill additionally specifies processes for determining payment rates for laboratory tests that are not advanced diagnostic tests, are not widely available, and lack adequate claims data. The CMS must use certain existing processes to set appropriate rates.
The bill also delays scheduled payment reductions for laboratory tests until 2028 and allows for judicial and administrative review of payment rates.
People & committees
Rep. Hudson, Richard [R-NC-9] · R–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Nov 3, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.5269 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.5269 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.5269 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.5269 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.