hist142410Senator LeMahieu, with unanimous consent, asked that the rules be suspended and the bill be given its third reading. Read a third time and passed.
Senate Bill 416
Relating to: reports of sexual abuse of children placed in out-of-home care.
hist142414Senator LeMahieu, with unanimous consent, asked that the rules be suspended and the bill be given its third reading. Read a third time and passed.
Senate Bill 417
Relating to: requiring the transmission of citizen review panel annual reports and the written responses of the Department of Children and Families to the appropriate legislative standing committees.
hist142418Senator LeMahieu, with unanimous consent, asked that the rules be suspended and the bill be given its third reading. Read a third time and passed.
Senate Bill 418
Relating to: annual reports to and hearings by the legislative standing committees on child abuse and neglect.
hist142422Senator LeMahieu, with unanimous consent, asked that the rules be suspended and the bill be given its third reading. Read a third time and passed.
Senate Bill 419
Relating to: notification to tribal chairs and tribal law enforcement agencies for a sexually violent person being placed on supervised release in a county in which the tribe is located.
hist142426Senator LeMahieu, with unanimous consent, asked that the rules be suspended and the bill be given its third reading. Read a third time and passed.
Senate Bill 420
Relating to: battery or threat to an officer of the court in a tribal proceeding and providing a penalty.
hist142430Senator LeMahieu, with unanimous consent, asked that the rules be suspended and the bill be given its third reading. Read a third time.
The question was: Passage of Senate Bill 420?
The ayes and noes were demanded and the vote was: ayes, 31; noes, 1; absent or not voting, 1; as follows:
Ayes - Senators Agard, Ballweg, Bernier, Bewley, Bradley, Carpenter, Cowles, Darling, Erpenbach, Felzkowski, Feyen, Jagler, Johnson, Kapenga, Kooyenga, Larson, LeMahieu, Marklein, Nass, Petrowski, Pfaff, Ringhand, Roth, Smith, Stafsholt, Stroebel, L. Taylor, Testin, Wanggaard, Wimberger and Wirch - 31.
Noes - Senator Roys - 1.
Absent or not voting - Senator Jacque - 1.
Passed.
Senate Bill 453
Relating to: prior authorization of specially formulated nutritional supplements and replacements.
hist142433The question was: Adoption of Senate Substitute Amendment 1 to Senate Bill 453? Adopted.
hist142435Senator LeMahieu, with unanimous consent, asked that the rules be suspended and the bill be given its third reading. Read a third time and passed.
Senate Bill 454
Relating to: reading readiness assessments and granting rule-making authority.
hist142438The question was: Adoption of Senate Amendment 3 to Senate Bill 454? The ayes and noes were demanded and the vote was: ayes, 20; noes, 12; absent or not voting, 1; as follows:
Ayes - Senators Ballweg, Bernier, Bradley, Cowles, Darling, Felzkowski, Feyen, Jagler, Kapenga, Kooyenga, LeMahieu, Marklein, Nass, Petrowski, Roth, Stafsholt, Stroebel, Testin, Wanggaard and Wimberger - 20.
Noes - Senators Agard, Bewley, Carpenter, Erpenbach, Johnson, Larson, Pfaff, Ringhand, Roys, Smith, L. Taylor and Wirch - 12.
Absent or not voting - Senator Jacque - 1.
Adopted.
hist142439Senator LeMahieu moved that Senate Amendment 4 to Senate Bill 454 be rejected. The question was: Rejection of Senate Amendment 4 to Senate Bill 454?
The ayes and noes were demanded and the vote was: ayes, 20; noes, 12; absent or not voting, 1; as follows:
Ayes - Senators Ballweg, Bernier, Bradley, Cowles, Darling, Felzkowski, Feyen, Jagler, Kapenga, Kooyenga, LeMahieu, Marklein, Nass, Petrowski, Roth, Stafsholt, Stroebel, Testin, Wanggaard and Wimberger - 20.
Noes - Senators Agard, Bewley, Carpenter, Erpenbach, Johnson, Larson, Pfaff, Ringhand, Roys, Smith, L. Taylor and Wirch - 12.
Absent or not voting - Senator Jacque - 1.
Rejected.
hist142442Senator LeMahieu moved that Senate Amendment 5 to Senate Bill 454 be rejected. The question was: Rejection of Senate Amendment 5 to Senate Bill 454?
The ayes and noes were demanded and the vote was: ayes, 20; noes, 12; absent or not voting, 1; as follows:
Ayes - Senators Ballweg, Bernier, Bradley, Cowles, Darling, Felzkowski, Feyen, Jagler, Kapenga, Kooyenga, LeMahieu, Marklein, Nass, Petrowski, Roth, Stafsholt, Stroebel, Testin, Wanggaard and Wimberger - 20.
Noes - Senators Agard, Bewley, Carpenter, Erpenbach, Johnson, Larson, Pfaff, Ringhand, Roys, Smith, L. Taylor and Wirch - 12.
Absent or not voting - Senator Jacque - 1.
Rejected.
hist142444Senator LeMahieu, with unanimous consent, asked that the rules be suspended and the bill be given its third reading. Read a third time.
POINT OF ORDER
Senator Carpenter raised the point of order that the Chair should allow Senator Larson to respond to a question about what Senator Larson would have said had the senate granted Senator Larson leave to speak for a third time on the question of passage of Senate Bill 454.
_____________
RULING ON POINT OF ORDER
Senate Rule 59 provides in part that “[m]embers may not speak except from their assigned places, and not more than twice on a question, except on leave of the senate.” In this instance, Senator Larson requested unanimous consent to speak for a third time on the question of passage of Senate Bill 454. Senator Kooyenga objected to this request. Senator Carpenter then asked what Senator Larson would have said had the senate granted him leave to speak for a third time. While the senate has a long tradition of allowing members to ask questions of one another to obtain information during debate, this tradition does not allow a member to evade Senate Rule 59’s prohibition against speaking more than twice on the same question without leave of the senate. In certain circumstances, it may be allowable for a member who has already spoken twice on the same question to respond to a narrow request for specific information without leave of the senate. However, if the senate were to allow members to speak broadly an unlimited number of times on the same question through responding to open-ended questions asked by other members it would eviscerate Senate Rule 59’s intended purpose of facilitating efficient debate. Therefore, the Chair rules the point not well taken.
The question was: Passage of Senate Bill 454?
The ayes and noes were demanded and the vote was: ayes, 20; noes, 12; absent or not voting, 1; as follows:
