Point of order:
Representative Wagner rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 5 to Assembly Bill 367 [relating to increasing marriage license application and related fees] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (e) because it negates the effect of assembly amendment 4.
[Note:] The bill proposed to increase the fee for a marriage license from $4.50 to $9.50 without changing the state share ($1.50 per license). A.Amdt.4, which was adopted, authorized each county to set its own fee subject to a $9.50 maximum and the $1.50 state share.
Since it accepted marriage license fees set by county boards, A.Amdt 5 did not negate AA-4. A.Amdt.5 dealt only with the detail of county board fee setting (eliminate $9.50 maximum, $1.50 state share).
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of January 22, 1980 .......... Page: 1864
Point of order:
Representative Ferrall rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 966 [relating to creating a department of energy, and a division of public utility consumer affairs in the department of justice, reorganizing the public service commission and state energy functions, granting rule-making authority, making appropriations and providing a penalty] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (c) [misprint: (f)?] because it related to
selection of members of the public service commission. The speaker took the point of order under advisement.
Assembly Journal of January 24, 1980 .......... Page: 1945
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled well taken the point of order raised by Representative Ferrall that assembly substitute amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 966 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
Assembly Journal of January 23, 1980 .......... Page: 1882
Point of order:
Representative Hauke rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 2 to senate substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 8 [relating to battery to persons 62 years of age or older and providing a penalty] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (1).
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order well taken.
392 [Note:] As returned by the Senate, 1979 AB 8 adhered to the original intent of changing battery to a person over 62 from a Class A misdemeanor to a Class E felony.
A.Amdt.2 (above) expanded the scope and purpose of the proposal by making every battery involving a high probability of great bodily harm a Class E felony.
A.Amdt.4 (below) retained the entire Senate version, but added a mandatory 1-year prison term [particularized detail].
Assembly Journal of January 23, 1980 .......... Page: 1884
Point of order:
Representative Hauke rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 4 to senate substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 8 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope] because it includes mandatory minimum sentencing.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of April 26, 1979 .......... Page: 457
Point of order:
Representative Tuczynski rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 3 to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 40 [relating to
restricting the pay of a public employe receiving a retirement benefit from a public employe retirement system, granting rule-making authority ....] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (b) and (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] Both the bill, and A.Sub.1, vested rule-making authority in the secretary of employe trust funds subject to the then established procedures under ch. 227, stats.
A.Amdt.3 proposed for such rules the administrative rules review and clearinghouse procedure later enacted as part of Chap. 34, Laws of 1979 (budget act).
The chair [Rep. Kirby] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of February 27, 1979 .......... Page: 215
Point of order:
Representative Lallensack rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 46 [relating to increasing the ceiling on the public debt for veterans' mortgage loans and making an appropriation] was not germane under Assembly Rule 50 because the constitutional amendment providing for public debt for veterans' housing which was approved by the people in April 1975 (Wis. Constitution Article VIII, Sections 3 and 7) provided for general obligation bonding and not revenue bonding as contained in the substitute amendment.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order not well taken because amendments to bills are not required to be germane to the constitution. He also ruled: 1) the substitution of revenue bonding for general obligation bonding was a matter of particularized details and not one individual proposition amending another, 2) the substitute was intended to accomplish the same purpose in a different manner, and 3) the scope of the proposal was not expanded by changing the amount of the appropriation.
393Germaneness: repealer bill (amendment to)
1 9 9 3 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of January 25, 1994 .......... Page: 554
Point of order:
Representative Wood rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 836 [relating to the requirement that an effective recycling
program include volume-based solid waste fees] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (d).
[Note:] A.Amdt-1 proposed to postpone the application of the existing statute from the effective date of the bill until 1997. Inasmuch as the bill was a one-line repealer of the existing statute, the amendment was clearly not germane.
There may have been some confusion because A.Rule 54 (4) (f) allows amending a repealer bill so as to delay the effective date of the repeal.
The chair (Speaker pro tempore Carpenter) ruled the point of order well taken.
1 9 9 3 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of January 26, 1993 .......... Page: 41
[Point of order:]
Senator Adelman raised the point of order that the amendment [Senate amendment 1 to Senate Bill 1, "relating to deleting the advisory referenda questions on gambling from the April 6, 1993, spring election ballot"] was not germane.
394 [Note:] By Section 9m of 1991 WisAct 321, the 1991 legislature had placed 5 advisory referenda concerning gambling on the 1993 spring election ballot. Of these, the first 3 concerned forms of gambling not permitted by law: 1) riverboat gambling; 2) casino gambling; and 3) video poker and other forms of video gambling. The remaining 2 asked the voters whether they favored continuing two of the forms of gambling specifically authorized by the constitution: 4) pari-mutuel on-track betting on races; and 5) continuing to allow the state-operated lottery. Senate Bill 1 proposed to remove all 5 questions from the ballot.
At the same time, the 1991 legislature gave first consideration approval to a constitutional amendment strictly defining the types of gambling permitted as part of the state lottery. The 1993 legislature agreed on 2nd consideration (Enrolled Joint Resolution 3), placing the constitutional amendment also on the April 1993 spring election ballot.
Senate amendment 1 to 1993 Senate Bill 1 did not propose to amend any of the 5 questions to be repealed. Rather, senate amendment 1 limited the scope of the proposal by removing only the first 3 questions (gambling expansion) from the ballot, and retaining the last 2 (continuation of gambling authorized by the constitution).
An amendment limiting the scope of the proposal from a 5-item repeal to a 3-item repeal was arguably germane under S.Rule 50 (7).
The Chair [President Risser] ruled the point not well taken.
{{{{{{{{{{{{{ 1 9 9 1 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of March 12, 1991 .......... Page: 103
Point of order:
Representative Black rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 10 [relating to requests for increased appropriations to state agencies] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (d).
[Note:] The original bill was a 1-line repealer of the "gag rule" statute, s. 19.45 (12): "No agency .... or officer or employe thereof may present any request, or knowingly utilize any interests outside the agency to present any request, to either house of the legislature or any member or committee thereof, for appropriations which exceed the amount requested by the agency in the agency's most recent [budget] request"....
Under A.Rule 54 (4) (f), an amendment that "reduces the scope of a repeal" is germane. Thus, in theory it would be germane to replace the repeal of a general prohibition with a prohibition limited to one or more specific classes.
A.Amdt-1 to 1991 AB 10 did not fit A.Rule 54 (4) (f). The amendment replaced the repeal of the statute with a "repeal and recreate" which, while retaining the general prohibition, added 4 exceptions leaving it doubtful that the prohibition could still be applied under any circumstances.
An amendment "amending a statute or session law" is not germane "when the purpose of the proposal is limited to repealing such law"; A.Rule 54 (3) (d).
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled the point of order well taken.
1 9 8 3 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of April 6, 1984 .......... Page: 1198
Point of order:
Representative Brist rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Senate Bill 689 [relating to repealing certain restrictions on deduction of advertising, display and promotional allowances from cost under the unfair sales act] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54.
395 [Note:] 1983 Senate Bill 689 was a one-line repealer bill. A.Sub.1 did not even contain that repeal - clearly, it was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (d) [amending repealer bills].
Since A.Sub.1 to SB 689 was identical to 1983 SB 403, which was also pending in the Assembly, the substitute was a classic example of a "rider" amendment or substitute which is "not germane" under A.Rule 54 (3) (a) [one individual proposition amending another individual proposition].
Finally, because the substitute did not even contain the repeal which was the sole purpose of the original bill, the substitute "would totally alter the nature of the proposal" in violation of A.Rule 54 (1).
The speaker [Loftus] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of March 13, 1984 .......... Page: 922
Point of order:
Representative T. Thompson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 939 [relating to repealing the police powers of city council members] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (d) [amending a repealer bill]. The speaker took the point of order under advisement.
[Note:] The original bill repealed the police powers of common council members, granted under a statute section that applied to all 2nd, 3rd and 4th class cities but was optional for first class cities. A.Amdt.1 preserved the aldermanic police power for first class cities. A.Sub.1 prohibited it to first class cities.
The issue was subsequently resolved by bringing in a new bill (AB 1139), which passed and became 1983 WisAct 210.
Assembly Journal of March 13, 1984 .......... Page: 923
Representative T. Thompson withdrew his point of order on assembly amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 939.
Assembly Journal of March 14, 1984 .......... Page: 941
Point of order:
Representative T. Thompson rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 939 [relating to repealing the police powers of city council members] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (d)
[amending a repealer bill]. The speaker took the point of order under advisement.
Assembly Journal of March 14, 1984 .......... Page: 942
Representative T. Thompson withdrew his point of order on assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 939. Representative Johnson asked unanimous consent that Assembly Bill 939 be laid on the table. Granted.
Assembly Journal of June 1, 1983 .......... Page: 236
Point of order:
Representative D. Travis rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Senate Bill 89 [relating to designating the Antigo silt loam as the state soil] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (d).
396 [Note:] The bill added an additional symbol to the list of statutory state symbols; A.Sub.1 proposed to repeal the entire existing listing.
Under A.Rule 54 (3) (d) 2, an amendment to repeal a statute or session law is not germane when the purpose of the proposal is limited to amending such law.
The speaker [Loftus] ruled the point of order well taken.
1 9 8 1 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of October 27, 1981 .......... Page: 1499
Point of order:
Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 10 to Senate Bill 558 [relating to interest rate ceilings, prepayment of loans and finance charges] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (d) [amending a repealer].
[Note:] The amendment appears to have been intended to delete a sunset, thus making a 4-year change in interest ceilings permanent.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of October 21, 1981 .......... Page: 1376
Point of order:
Representative Shabaz rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to Senate Bill 411 [relating to extending the existence of the fertilizer research council] not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (d) 1 [amending a repealer]. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
[Note:] In Chap. 418, Laws of 1977, which was a budget review act, SECTION 930 (3) gave a 3-year delayed effect to SECTION 20n, repeal of the Fertilizer Research Council [s. 15.137 (5)], and SECTION 583k, repeal of the program responsibility of that council [s. 94.64 (8m) (b)]. The 1981 bill, by repealing the three 1977 session laws, attempted to reinstate the 2 statutes.
It is well settled that no statute repealed by an act of the legislature is revived or affected by the repeal of the repealing act; see s. 990.03, stats. The original bill could not accomplish its intended purpose; the amendment, by (again) creating ss. 15.137 (5) and 94.64 (8m) (b), reached the intended result and was enacted.
Assembly Journal of October 21, 1981 .......... Page: 1387
The chair ruled that assembly amendment 1 to Senate Bill 411 was germane under Assembly Rule 54 (4) (b) [same purpose accomplished in different manner] and the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of May 7, 1981 .......... Page: 466
[Repeal of sunset:]
397 Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 320 [relating to eliminating the expiration date for collective bargaining
impasse resolution procedures for local government employes other than law enforcement and fire fighting personnel] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (d) 1 [amending a statute or session law when the purpose of the proposal is limited to repealing such law].
Representative Lee stated that the amendment was germane under Assembly Rule 54 (4) (f) [changing the effective date or reducing the scope of a repeal] and cited the ruling of the speaker on amendments to 1977 Senate Bill 294 on March 8, 1978. The speaker took the point of order under advisement.
[Note:] 1977 SB 294 was a one-line repealer bill concerning an exception; the effect of the repeal was to require administrative rule-making. In 1977, A.Amdt.1 (delayed effective date) was challenged and ruled valid; A.Amdt.2 (rule-making procedure) was ruled invalid because one of its provisions expanded the scope of the proposal; and A.Amdt.3 (particularized detail of rule-making in the area previously covered by the exception) was ruled valid.
1981 AB 320 repealed the 10/31/81 sunset of "mediation arbitration" and, thereby, made the procedure permanent. A.Sub.1 proposed to postpone the sunset to 10/31/85 - i.e.; rather than delaying the effective date for making the
procedure permanent, the substitute merely extended by 4 years the life expectancy of the temporary procedure.
