The civic record
Read. Follow. Verify.Texas House bill 1699 sets a three-day waiting period before sensitive medical test results can be released electronically
Last action · May 5, 2025: Laid on the table subject to callSponsors: Fairly and 7 others
Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.
What This Bill Proposed
Physicians and administrators in Texas are prohibited from releasing pathology reports, radiology reports with a likelihood of malignancy, or genetic marker test results to online patient portals until at least three days after the results are finalized, starting September 1, 2025.
- House Bill 1699 is considered during the 89th Regular Session of the Texas Legislature. context
- Medical record disclosures and physician confidentiality in Texas are primarily governed by Chapter 159 of the Occupations Code. context
Who It Would Have Affected
Groups the bill's text would have affected, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.
Physicians
Physicians must follow updated timelines and electronic disclosure rules when releasing requested medical information.
Patients
Patients and their representatives face a three-day waiting period before viewing sensitive pathology, radiology, or genetic test results on electronic portals.
Electronic health record administrators
Administrators controlling patient electronic health records are explicitly responsible for implementing the three-day withholding rule for sensitive test results.
Key Facts
You don't have to trust us. Each fact below is taken straight from the official document - click any one to see the exact passage, highlighted in the original.
Frequently Asked Questions
What types of medical test results are delayed by this bill?
How long is the mandatory delay before sensitive results appear online?
Who is responsible for enforcing the waiting period on patient portals?
What else do you want to know?
News Coverage
Follow the record
Votes, people, money & the original sourceWhere This Stands
This bill did not become law - Tabled in the House.
Procedural history
18 actions- May 5, 2025HouseLaid on the table subject to call
- May 5, 2025HouseCompanion considered in lieu of (SB 922)
- May 2, 2025HousePlaced on General State Calendar
- Apr 30, 2025HouseConsidered in Calendars
- Apr 25, 2025HouseCommittee report sent to Calendars
- Apr 23, 2025HouseCommittee report distributed
Show 12 earlier actions
- Apr 23, 2025HouseComte report filed with Committee Coordinator
- Apr 14, 2025HouseCommitteeReported favorably as substituted
- Apr 14, 2025HouseCommittee substitute considered in committee
- Apr 14, 2025HouseConsidered in public hearing
- Mar 24, 2025HouseLeft pending in committee
- Mar 24, 2025HouseTestimony taken/registration(s) recorded in committee
- Mar 24, 2025HouseCommittee substitute considered in committee
- Mar 24, 2025HouseConsidered in public hearing
- Mar 24, 2025HouseScheduled for public hearing on . . .
- Mar 12, 2025HouseCommitteeReferred to Public Health
- Mar 12, 2025HouseIntroducedRead first time
- Dec 20, 2024HouseIntroducedFiled
Version history
Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.
View official text →Lobbying Activity
No state lobbying filings in our records match this bill. Federal lobbying reports (LDA) cover Congress, so they are not listed on state bills.
Full breakdown
Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.
Sponsors
Discoveries
Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.
Introduction of Electronic Holding Period for Diagnostic Results
The bill creates a specific carve-out for sensitive diagnostic results (pathology, radiology, and genetics) within electronic health record disclosure rules, departing from standard rapid electronic delivery.
Connected Entities
Sources
capitol.texas.gov
Analysis Score
0–100- Significance20Lowered because this bill did not pass (its text scored 60)
- Controversy25Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
- Entertainment5Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
- Buzz30Current news / social attention level
Publisher tools