Point of order:
Representative Duren rose to the point of order that the report of the committee of conference [on Assembly Bill 725; relating to provisions of professional liability insurance policies for health care providers] was amendable.
The speaker [Anderson] ruled the point of order not well taken.
1 9 7 3 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of May 22, 1974 .......... Page: 188
[Selection of conferees: Senate Bill 5, Special Session, relating to regulation of elections and campaign contributions and expenditures, providing for public financing of certain political campaigns, granting rule-making authority, providing penalties and making appropriations.]
Senator Johnson moved nonconcurrence in assembly substitute amendment 2. The motion prevailed.
Senator Johnson moved that a Committee of Conference be appointed on Senate Bill 5, Special Session. The motion prevailed.
The chair appointed Senators Murphy, Bablitch and LaFave as conferees on the part of the senate.
Senate Journal of May 22, 1974 .......... Page: 193
[Point of order:]
Senator Risser raised the point of order that Senator LaFave was shown as being absent on the vote of passage on Senate Bill 5, (Spring 1974) Special Session and therefore, should not be appointed to the Committee of Conference on the bill.
The chair ruled the point of order well taken as page 133 of the special session journal showed the senator absent.
Senator Johnson appealed the ruling of the chair. The question was: Shall the ruling of the chair stand as the decision of the senate? The ayes and noes were required and the vote was: [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-14, noes-15.] So the ruling of the chair was not sustained.
72 Senator Risser moved to amend the appointments by substituting Senator Lorge for Senator LaFave.
By request of Senator Lorge, with unanimous consent, the amendment was laid on the table.
Senator Johnson moved confirmation of the conferees to Senate Bill 5, Special Session. The motion prevailed.
Upon motion of Senator Johnson the senate adjourned pursuant to a 48 hour notice by the majority and minority floor leaders.
Senate Journal of July 26, 1973 .......... Page: 1500
[Senate control over conference committee appointments:]
By request of Senator Risser, with unanimous consent, Senate Bill 9 was ordered immediately messaged with a request for a committee on conference.
Senate Journal of July 26, 1973 .......... Page: 1567
State of Wisconsin
Office of the Lieutenant Governor
Madison
Mr. William P. Nugent September 19, 1973
Senate Chief Clerk
243 South Capitol
Madison, Wisconsin
Dear Bill:
I hereby notify you that the Senate Conferees on Senate Bill 9 are:
Senator Fred Risse
Senator Walter Hollander
Senator Walter J. Chilsen
Yours very truly
MARTIN J. SCHREIBER, Lieutenant Governor
Senate Journal of October 4, 1973 .......... Page: 1629
[Point of order:]
Senator Knutson raised the point of order challenging the composition of the chair's appointments to the Conference Committee on Senate Bill 9. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of October 11, 1973 .......... Page: 1713
Senator Knutson called the chair's attention to the point of order raised on Senate Bill 9 as it related to the membership of the senate Committee of Conference.
[Point of order:]
Senator Dorman raised the point of order that Senator Knutson's point of order was not timely.
The chair ruled the point of order not well taken as the senate remains in control of its members appointed to the Committee of Conference.
The question was: Shall the point of order, as raised by Senator Knutson, stand as the ruling of the senate?
73 Senator Risser moved a call of the senate. [Display of roll call omitted; present-29, absent-1, with leave-3; intervening text omitted.]
Senator Schuele called the chair's attention to the fact that all members being present the question was: Shall Senator Knutson's point of order stand as the ruling of the senate?
Senator Thompson asked unanimous consent that the question be laid on the table. Senator Knutson objected.
President of the senate in the chair.
Senator McKenna moved that the senate recall its members on the Committee of Conference on Senate Bill 9 and appoint new members pursuant to joint rule 2.
[Point of order:]
Senator Chilsen raised the point of order that the question on Senator Knutson's point of order took precedence over the motion made by Senator McKenna. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of October 26, 1973 .......... Page: 1905
By request of Senator Knutson, with unanimous consent, his point of order as it related to the membership of the conference committee on Senate Bill 9 was withdrawn.
The question was: Adoption of the conference committee report on Senate Bill 9?
The report was adopted.
By request of Senator Risser, with unanimous consent, Senate Bill 9 was ordered immediately messaged.
Senate Journal of July 24, 1973 .......... Page: 1408
[Reconsideration permitted on rejection of conference report:]
Assembly Bill 300 [relating to state finances and appropriations constituting the executive budget bill of the 1973 legislature, and making appropriations]
The question was: Adoption of the Committee of Conference report? Senator J. D. Swan moved rejection of the Committee of Conference report. [Intervening text omitted.]
The question was: Adoption of the Conference Committee Report? Senator J. D. Swan moved rejection.
The ayes and noes were demanded and the vote was: [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-17, noes-10.] So the motion prevailed.
Senator LaFave moved reconsideration of the vote by which the Conference Committee Report on Assembly Bill 300 was rejected. [Intervening text omitted.]
The question was: Reconsideration of the vote by which the Conference Committee Report on Assembly Bill 300 was rejected? Senator Lorge moved the previous question.
By request of Senator Johnson, with unanimous consent, the motion to put the previous question was laid on the table.
The question was: Reconsideration of the vote by which the Conference Committee Report on Assembly Bill 300 was rejected.
Senator Risser moved a call of the senate [Display of roll call omitted; present-29, absent-0, with leave-4; intervening text omitted.]
The question was: Reconsideration of the vote by which the Conference Committee Report on Assembly Bill 300 was rejected?
The ayes and noes were demanded and the vote was: [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-13, noes-12.] So the motion prevailed.
74Senate Journal of June 27, 1973 .......... Page: 1267
[Special conference committee created by joint resolution:]
Assembly Bill 300 [relating to state finances and appropriations constituting the executive budget bill of the 1973 legislature, and making appropriations].
Senator McKenna moved that the Senate Conference Committee on Assembly Bill 300 be recalled.
Senator McKenna asked unanimous consent that the motion to recall the Senate Conference Committee on Assembly Bill 300 be made a special order of business at 11:00 A.M. on Thursday, June 28. Senator Johnson objected.
Senator McKenna moved that the motion to recall the Senate Conferees be made a special order of business at 11:00 A.M. Thursday, June 28.
[Point of order:]
Senator Hollander raised the point of order that the motion must be in the form of a joint resolution as it affected both houses.
Senator Keppler raised the point of order that it took a joint resolution to create the Compromise Committee, therefore, it would take a joint resolution to recall the committee. The chair took the points of order under advisement. [No ruling given?]
Constitutional amendment (procedure on joint resolution proposing)
1 9 8 5 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of May 28, 1985 .......... Page: 200
[Point of order:]
Senator Lee raised the point of order that senate amendment 2 [to Assembly Joint Resolution 3, relating to removing obsolete provisions of the state constitution regarding elections and suffrage so as to revise the article on suffrage without impeding any voting rights granted under the constitution or laws of this state (2nd consideration) was not germane.
[Note:] S.Amdt.2 proposed to ingraft a Wisconsin equal rights amendment.
The amendment was a floor amendment. It could also have been ruled "not in proper form" because the reversion of a constitutional amendment from 2nd consideration to first consideration requires a substitute amendment; see J.Rule 55 (2)(b).
The chair [Pres. Risser] ruled the point of order well taken.
1 9 7 9 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of June 25, 1980 .......... Page: 3649
Point of order:
75 Representative Shabaz rose to the point of order that the language on page 1, lines 18 and 19 of the conference committee report on Assembly Joint Resolution 2, June 1980 Special Session [relating to revising the right to bail and authorizing the legislature to permit circuit courts to deny release on bail for a limited period to certain accused persons (first consideration)] was not germane to the special session call as required by Assembly Rule 93 (1).
[Note:] June 1980 AJR 2 had been introduced by the "committee on Assembly Organization, by request of Governor Lee Sherman Dreyfus" under paragraph (1) of the governor's proclamation of May 22, 1980, which read:
"(1) Amending Section 8 of Article I of the Wisconsin Constitution to authorize the Legislature by statute to permit circuit courts to deny release on bail for a limited period to certain accused persons."
On June 26, 1980, the governor issued a supplementary call to amend paragraph (1) to read:
"(1) Amending Section 8 of Article I of the Wisconsin Constitution, relating to revising the right to and conditions of bail and authorizing the Legislature, by law, to permit circuit courts to deny release on bail for a limited period to certain accused persons."
The supplementary call permitted introduction of Assembly Joint Resolution 9, June 1980 Special Session, which passed both houses.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order well taken because the language in the conference committee report related to the regulation of bail and was self-executing.
Assembly Journal of March 4, 1980 .......... Page: 2435
Point of order:
Representative Shabaz rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to Assembly Joint Resolution 99 [relating to county responsibility for the acts of the sheriff] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] In deleting the "acts of sheriff" county responsibility phrase from section 4 of article VI of the constitution in sub. (3), the constitutional amendment also proposed some clean-up work in subs. (4) and (5) so that the governor's power to fill county officer vacancies would be limited to "county offices filled by election", thus excluding county offices filled by appointment by the county board (none of which had existed in 1848).
It turned out that even this limitation was too broad, because vacancies in county judicial offices and in the office of county executive were already covered by different arrangements.
Consequently, A.Amdt.1 substituted "in the offices of sheriff, coroner, register of deeds or district attorney" for "in county offices filled by election".
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Senate Journal of October 30, 1979 .......... Page: 935
[Point of order:]
Senator Swan raised the point of order that senate amendment 2 to Senate Joint Resolution 28 [to amend section 3 of article XI of the constitution, relating to Milwaukee city or county indebtedness for a sewage collection or treatment system (first consideration)] was not germane. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
