Representative Foti asked unanimous consent that the Assembly stand recessed. Granted.
The Assembly stood recessed.
5:50 P.M.
__________________
8:35 P.M.
The Assembly reconvened.
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese in the chair.
Representative Foti asked unanimous consent for a quorum call. Granted.
A quorum was present.
__________________
By Donald J. Schneider, Senate Chief Clerk.
Mr. Speaker:
I am directed to inform you that the Senate has
Concurred in:
Assembly Bill 495
Adopted and asks concurrence in:
Committee of Conference report on Assembly Bill 133
__________________
Assembly Bill 133
Relating to: state finances and appropriations, constituting the executive budget act of the 1999 legislature.
__________________
Read first time and referred:
Assembly Joint Resolution 78
Relating to: the procedures of the legislature regarding the report of the committee of conference on 1999 Assembly Bill 133.
By
Representative
Cullen
.
To committee on Rules.
A383
Representative Cullen asked unanimous consent that the rules be suspended and that
Assembly Joint Resolution 78 be withdrawn from the committee on
Rules and taken up at this time.
Representative Foti objected.
Representative Cullen moved that the rules be suspended and that Assembly Joint Resolution 78 be withdrawn from the committee on Rules and taken up at this time.
The question was: Shall the rules be suspended and Assembly Joint Resolution 78 be withdrawn from the committee on Rules and taken up at this time?
The roll was taken.
The result follows:
Ayes - Representatives Balow, Berceau, Black, Bock, Boyle, Carpenter, Coggs, Colon, Cullen, Gronemus, Hasenohrl, Hebl, Huber, Hubler, Kreuser, Krug, Krusick, La Fave, Lassa, J. Lehman, Meyer, Meyerhofer, Miller, Morris-Tatum, Plale, Plouff, Pocan, Reynolds, Richards, Riley, Ryba, Schneider, Schooff, Sherman, Sinicki, Staskunas, Steinbrink, Travis, Turner, Wasserman, Waukau, Williams, Wood, Young and Ziegelbauer - 45.
Noes - Representatives Ainsworth, Albers, Brandemuehl, Duff, Foti, Freese, Gard, Goetsch, Grothman, Gunderson, Gundrum, Hahn, Handrick, Hoven, Huebsch, Hundertmark, Hutchison, Jeskewitz, Johnsrud, Kaufert, Kedzie, Kelso, Kestell, Klusman, Kreibich, Ladwig, F. Lasee, M. Lehman, Leibham, Montgomery, Musser, Nass, Olsen, Ott, Owens, Petrowski, Pettis, Porter, Powers, Rhoades, Seratti, Skindrud, Spillner, Stone, Suder, Sykora, Townsend, Underheim, Urban, Vrakas, Walker, Ward, Wieckert and Speaker Jensen - 54.
Absent or not voting - None.
Motion failed.
Assembly Bill 133
Relating to: state finances and appropriations, constituting the executive budget act of the 1999 legislature.
Representative Hubler asked for a division of the question on concurrence in the committee of conference report on Assembly Bill 133.
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese took the request under advisement.
The Assembly stood informal.
9:15 P.M.
The Assembly reconvened.
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese in the chair.
9:20 P.M.
The Chair denied the request by Representative Hubler for a division of the question on concurrence in the committee of conference report on Assembly Bill 133.
__________________
Representative Hubler rose to the point of order that the committee of conference report on
Assembly Bill 133 is divisible under Assembly Rule
80.
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese took the point of order under advisement.
Representative Foti asked unanimous consent that the Assembly stand recessed. Granted.
The Assembly stood recessed.
9:37 P.M.
__________________
10:10 P.M.
The Assembly reconvened.
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese in the chair.
__________________
The Chair ruled
not well taken the point of order raised by Representative Hubler that the committee of conference report on Assembly Bill 133 is divisible.
The complete text of the Chair follows:
"The Lady from the 75th had raised a Point Of Order that didn't basically agree with the Chair declaring her motion to divide the Conference Committee Report. She raised a Point Of Order that the Conference Committee Report could be divided, as I understood it, into Sections 1, 2, and 3. I believe her original motion was to divide it into Item 3.
The Chair has spent some time trying to work through this particular Point Of Order to make sure because I am sure that the Lady will ask that it become precedent in the rulings of the Chair. So the Chair has taken some time looking at Assembly Rules, Joint Rules, Senate Rules, Mason's Manual and Jefferson's Manual to try to resolve this issue. The Lady from the 75th and the Gentleman from the 44th make the Point Of Order that we can divide it into different components based on Assembly Rule
80(4).
Assembly Rule
80(4) lists what is not divisible and because the Report On Committees doesn't happen to show up there it is the belief, I believe, of the Lady from the 75th and the Gentleman from the 44th that because it is merely not stated there, that it is divisible. One has to, I believe, look at Assembly Rule
80(1), which is "any member may request a division of simple amendments and motions involving distinct and independent propositions or concurrent action if they are severable without being rewritten or restated and the question shall be divided if each separate proposition or action to be voted on is complete and proper, regardless of the action taken on the other portions of the original question."
A384
So the Chair looked, taking the advice that the Lady from the 75th and the Gentleman from the 44th were telling the Chair that this is a Report on the Committee On Conference. It is not an amendment, they report, because it is not specifically talked about in Assembly Rule
80(4). Therefore, it is divisible. It is the Chair's opinion, that under Assembly Rule
80(1), which governs what is divisible, this simply is not an amendment. It is not a simple amendment. Actually, if we were even to take conference amendment l, which is an amendment to the Assembly Substitute Amendment, I think members can easily see that this is just not a simple amendment. It is rather complex. It's actually a little longer than Gone With the Wind, and has quite a bit more intrigue in it, I think.
So, it is clearly, to the Chair, not a division of a simple amendment because as the Lady from the 75th and Gentleman from the 44th pointed out in their Points Of Order, that it was a report that should be divided based on the fact that it didn't show up in 80(4).
Then the Chair went one step further just to have a little more comfort because if it were an amendment, could this amendment be divided and taken up in three different components? It is the Chair's belief that under Assembly Rule
80(1), that each question if they were divided, Question l., Question 2 and Question 3 and were separate propositions or actions to be voted on, would be complete and proper regardless of the action taken on the others. And it is this Chair's opinion that they would not be, as the Chair was asking during the point of order that was being raised if Section l were adopted and Section 2 and Section 3 were not, could the bill stand on its own? The Chair's belief is, no it could not. If Section 2 were adopted but not Sections 1 and 3 the same situation. Or, if only Section 3 were adopted without negating the actions taken by the Senate and Assembly, could it stand on its own? It is the Chair's belief that it could not.
But wanting to make sure because knowing the Lady from the 75th was going to be fairly persistent and the Gentleman from the 44th is a scholar of the rules, I wanted to make sure that I wasn't not reading this properly and when one looks at the Joint Rules, Joint Rule
3(3) "approval of the Conference Report by roll call vote in each house sufficient to constitute final passage of the proposal shall be final passage of the bill or Joint Resolution in the form and with the changes proposed by the report." And the Joint Rules really are silent on whether or not we can amend the Conference Report.
So the Chair looked at Senate Rules which are somewhat more obscure than ours and really not to the point, so the Chair looked at what other rules are available to us to determine and under Assembly Rule
91(1) "in the absence of pertinent Assembly or Joint Rules questions of parliamentary procedure shall be decided according to applicable rules of parliamentary practice and Jefferson's Manual which are not inconsistent with constitutional or statutory provisions relating to the functioning of the legislature."
So, upon reading about the statutory provisions, we did a search of the Wisconsin Statutes and Constitution to see if there is something that would apply there. Of course, that didn't help us. So the Chair then referred to Jefferson's Manual. And, if members want to take a look on page 47 in the section on Conferences on page 48 as well and the ending of this regarding conference committees "and each party reports in writing to its respective house the substance of what is said on both sides and entered into the Journal."
And that is the report we have before us. "This report can not be amended or altered as that of the committee may be." So, the backup for Assembly Rules and Joint Rules was Jefferson's Manual but also wanting to make sure that that is the established precedent, I looked to Mason's Manual which is the manual we often refer to as well and under Section 770 (2) it says "in voting in a conference committee, the committee of each house votes separately. The committee on conference from each house submits its report to the house from which it was appointed, "which we have. "The report upon being received may be treated like other reports except that the report of the conference committee is usually given higher precedence."
That's why we're here at l0:00 p.m. "Under no condition, including suspension of the rules may the house alter or amend the Report of the Committee, but must adopt or refuse to adopt the report in the form submitted."
So it is the opinion of the Chair that the Lady from the 75th's Point Of Order is not well taken based on those following reasons."
__________________
Read first time and referred:
Assembly Joint Resolution 79
Relating to: the procedures of the legislature regarding the report of the committee of conference on 1999 Assembly Bill 133.
By
Representative
Cullen
.
To committee on Rules.
__________________
Representative Cullen rose to the point of order that Assembly Joint Resolution 79 was privileged.
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese took the point of order under advisement.
__________________
The Chair ruled
well taken that the point of order raised by Representative Cullen that Assembly Joint Resolution 79 was privileged.
__________________
