SJR5: Joint Resolution Text

LRB-0440/2

RAC:wlj:rs

2007 - 2008 LEGISLATURE

2007 Senate JOINT RESOLUTION 5

January 16, 2007 - Introduced by Senators Carpenter, Harsdorf, Lehman, S. Fitzgerald, Darling, Grothman, Olsen, A. Lasee, Schultz, Leibham, Kedzie, Cowles, Roessler, Kapanke, Lazich, Kanavas and Ellis, cosponsored by Representatives Friske, Stone, Albers, Pridemore, Kerkman, Gundrum, Lothian, Ballweg, Strachota, Musser, Bies, Tauchen, J. Fitzgerald, Townsend, Vos, Gunderson, Nerison, Gottlieb, Kestell, Montgomery, Suder, Hahn, Jeskewitz, Moulton, Van Roy, Kleefisch, Mursau, Rhoades, Kramer, F. Lasee, Honadel, Wood, Ziegelbauer, Owens, Nass, Murtha, Nygren, Petersen, M. Williams, Meyer, Ott, Vukmir, Hines and LeMahieu. Referred to Committee on Ethics Reform and Government Operations.

SJR5,1,2 To amend section 10 (1) (c) of article V of the constitution; relating to: prohibiting partial vetoes from creating new sentences (second consideration).

Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau

Explanation of Proposal This proposed constitutional amendment, to be given second consideration by the 2007 legislature for submittal to the voters in April 2007, was first considered by the 2005 legislature in 2005 Senate Joint Resolution 33, which became 2005 Enrolled Joint Resolution 46.

The proposed constitutional amendment prohibits the governor, in exercising his or her partial veto authority on appropriation bills, from creating new sentences by combining parts of two or more sentences of the enrolled bill.

Procedure for second ConsideratioN When a proposed constitutional amendment is before the legislature on second consideration, any change in the text approved by the preceding legislature causes the proposed constitutional amendment to revert to first consideration status so that second consideration approval would have to be given by the next legislature before the proposal may be submitted to the people for ratification [see joint rule 57 (2)]. If the legislature approves a proposed constitutional amendment on second consideration, it must also set the date for submitting the proposed constitutional amendment to the people for ratification and must determine the question or questions to appear on the ballot.

SJR5,2,4 Whereas, the 2005 legislature in regular session considered a proposed amendment to the constitution in 2005 Senate Joint Resolution 33, which became 2005 Enrolled Joint Resolution 46, and agreed to it by a majority of the members elected to each of the 2 houses, which proposed amendment reads as follows:

SJR5, s. 1 Section 1. Section 10 (1) (c) of article V of the constitution is amended to read:

[Article V] Section 10 (1) (c) In approving an appropriation bill in part, the governor may not create a new word by rejecting individual letters in the words of the enrolled bill, and may not create a new sentence by combining parts of 2 or more sentences of the enrolled bill.

SJR5,2,12 Now, therefore, be it resolved by the senate, the assembly concurring, That the foregoing proposed amendment to the constitution is agreed to by the 2007 legislature; and, be it further Resolved, That the foregoing proposed amendment to the constitution be submitted to a vote of the people at the election to be held on the first Tuesday of April, 2007; and, be it further Resolved, That the question concerning ratification of the foregoing proposed amendment to the constitution be stated on the ballot as follows:

SJR5,2,16 Question 1: "Partial veto. Shall section 10 (1) (c) of article V of the constitution be amended to prohibit the governor, in exercising his or her partial veto authority, from creating a new sentence by combining parts of two or more sentences of the enrolled bill?"

SJR5,2,17 (End)