By request of Senator Engeleiter, with unanimous consent, the bill was referred to a second reading.
Read a second time.
Senate amendment 1 offered by Senators Engeleiter and Davis.
[Point of order:]
Senator Norquist raised the point of order that senate amendment 1 was not germane.
232 [Note:] To qualify for exemption from nonresident tuition, existing law required 12 months Wisconsin residence immediately preceding admission to the UW system. The bill exempted from nonresident tuition any migrant worker who had worked in Wisconsin for at least 2 months/year in 3 of the preceding 5 years.
S.Amdt.1 proposed to grant a limited exemption (5 credits per semester), not tied to any specified length of residence, to any person employed full-time in this state who moved to Wisconsin for the purpose of such employment.
The chair [Pres. Risser] ruled the point of order well taken.
Senate Journal of October 20, 1983 .......... Page: 445
[Point of order:]
Senator Cullen raised the point of order that senate amendment 3 [to Senate Bill 427, relating to grant distribution from the Wisconsin election campaign fund] was not germane.
By request of Senator Opitz, with unanimous consent, senate amendment 3 was returned to the author.
Senate Journal of October 6, 1983 .......... Page: 389
[Point of order:]
Senator Otte raised the point of order that senate substitute amendment 1 [to Assembly Bill 26, relating to liability for nonmoving traffic violations with rented or leased vehicles] was not germane.
The chair [Pres. Risser] ruled the point of order not well taken. [Intervening text omitted.]
Senator Otte raised the point of order that senate amendment 1 to senate substitute amendment 1 was not germane.
[Note:] The senate substitute repeated the provisions of the assembly-passed version and, in addition, included a procedure for rental agency recovery of parking fines from the person who rented the vehicle.
S.Amdt.1 to the substitute attempted to cancel outstanding parking warrants dated prior to July 1, 1982.
The chair ruled the point of order well taken.
Senate Journal of May 3, 1983 .......... Page: 185
[Point of order:]
Senator Offner raised the point of order that senate amendment 4 [to Assembly Bill 250, relating to sexual activity between consenting adults] was not germane.
[Note:] While the bill itself proscribed, as a Class A misdemeanor, certain sexual conduct involving persons 16 to 18 years of age, S.Amdt.4 declared all sexual intercourse involving such a person to be a "4th degree sexual assault", punishable as a Class E felony.
The chair [Pres. Risser] ruled the point of order well taken.
233Senate Journal of May 3, 1983 .......... Page: 184
[Point of order:]
Senator Thompson raised the point of order that senate amendment 8 [to Assembly Bill 141, relating to the medium security correctional institution in Milwaukee and making appropriations] was not germane.
[Note:] The bill was limited to a specific institution in Milwaukee. S.Amdt.8 attempted to include an institution in Oshkosh.
The chair [Pres. Risser] ruled the point of order well taken.
1 9 8 1 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of March 31, 1982 .......... Page: 3160
Point of order:
Representative Thompson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 4 to Senate Bill 204 [relating to employment discrimination] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] A.Amdt.4, which was adopted and concurred in, added to the bill a provision requiring employers to notify prospective employes of any grooming requirements.
Sub. (3) of that provision created a forfeiture for failure to so notify. By allowing the division, the chair could avoid possibly ruling the entire amendment not germane.
Representative Crawford asked unanimous consent for a division of assembly amendment 4 to Senate Bill 204. Granted. The chair [Rep. Clarenbach] ruled lines 12 through 15 of assembly amendment 4 to Senate Bill 204 not germane.
The question was: Shall lines 1 through 11 and line 16 of assembly amendment 4 to Senate Bill 204 be adopted?
The roll was taken. [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-62, noes-34.] Motion carried.
Assembly Journal of March 26, 1982 .......... Page: 3009
Point of order:
Representative Jackamonis rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 3 to senate amendment 1 to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Senate Bill 250 [relating to access to public records, creating an open records board, granting rule-making authority, making appropriations and providing a penalty] was not germane to senate amendment 1 under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] Both the substitute as adopted by the assembly, and the senate amendment, dealt with general access to public records. A.Amdt.3 to A.Amdt.1 would have opened for press inspection and publication court records of juveniles which had been granted confidential status under the children's code. See also A.Jour. 3/4/82, p. 2526.
234 The chair [Rep. Tesmer, deputy speaker] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of March 19, 1982 .......... Page: 2873
Point of order:
Representative Quackenbush rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to assembly substitute amendment 2 to Assembly Bill 240 [relating to a revision of the obscenity law and the penalties for its violation] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] The amendment required bail on appeal of felony convictions under the obscenity law. For all other felony conviction appeals, bail would have remained at the court's discretion.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of March 18, 1982 .......... Page: 2818
Point of order:
Representative D. Travis rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to senate amendment 1 to assembly substitute amendment 2 to Senate Bill 683 [relating to congressional districts] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 because senate amendment 1 to assembly substitute amendment 2 to Senate Bill 683 did not change the boundaries of proposed congressional districts 4 and 5 but assembly amendment 1 to senate amendment 1 did change those boundaries.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the amendment not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (1), (3) (a) and (f) [substantial expansion of scope] because senate amendment 1, once adopted, became the main proposal before the assembly and it contained no reference to proposed congressional districts 4 and 5.
Assembly Journal of March 4, 1982 .......... Page: 2526
Point of order:
Representative Flintrop rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 17 to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Senate Bill 250 [relating to access to public records, creating an open records board, granting rule-making authority, making appropriations and providing a penalty] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] The bill dealt with general access to public records. A.Amdt.17 would have opened for press inspection and publication court records of juveniles which had been granted confidential status under the children's code. See also A.Jour. 3/26/82, p. 3009.
The chair [Rep. Wood] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of February 23, 1982 .......... Page: 2326
Point of order:
235 Representative Ulichny rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Senate Bill 150 [relating to changes in the regulation of motor carriers and granting rule-making authority] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] The substitute amendment concerned not only motor carriers, but included changes in railroad regulation and abolition of the transportation commission.
The chair [Rep. Tesmer, deputy speaker] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of February 9, 1982 .......... Page: 2070
Point of order:
Representative Thompson rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 732 [relating to requiring local units of government to set the dog license tax on unneutered male dogs and unspayed female dogs at a higher rate than on neutered male dogs and spayed female dogs] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] The purpose of the bill was to tax reproductive dogs at a higher rate than spayed or neutered dogs. The substitute retained those provisions and, in addition, increased the kennel license (an alternative to individual dog licenses) from $25 to $40 without reference to the reproductive status of the dogs in the kennel.
The chair [Rep. Tesmer, deputy speaker] took the point of order under advisement.
Assembly Journal of February 9, 1982 .......... Page: 2074
The chair [Rep. Tesmer, deputy speaker] ruled well taken the point of order raised by Representative Thompson that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 732 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
Assembly Journal of October 28, 1981 .......... Page: 1551
Point of order:
Representative Broydrick rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to senate amendment 6 to Assembly Bill 616 [relating to congressional districts] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] S.Amdt.6 was limited to a change, in the village of Shorewood, dividing CD-5 from CD-9.
A.Amdt.1 thereto would have changed CD-6 and CD-8, placing all of Waupaca county into CD-6 and all of Brown county into CD-8.
The assembly amendment not only expanded the scope of the senate amendment, but also violated A.Rule 54 (5) [amendment to amendment].
The same Brown/Waushara adjustment was subsequently introduced as 1981 AB 1133 and enacted as Chapter 155, Laws of 1981.
236 The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of June 9, 1981 .......... Page: 629
Point of order:
Representative Loftus rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to Senate Bill 359 [relating to demerit points for traffic convictions] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] A bill introduced by JCRAR "to support the objection" to promulgation of a proposed administrative rule must be very narrowly drafted so as not to interfere with administrative rule-making generally.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the amendment not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) and the point of order well taken. The speaker stated that amendments which might otherwise be germane to the bill, are not germane in this case because of the limited scope of Senate Bill 359. The bill was introduced pursuant to section 227.018 (5) (e) of the Wisconsin Statutes to fulfill the statutory purpose of ratifying the action of the Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules.
Assembly Journal of May 14, 1981 .......... Page: 519
Point of order:
Representative Hauke rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 85 [relating to the maximum recovery level for tort actions against local governmental entities and agencies] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (1).
[Note:] 1981 AB 85 dealt with the dollar value of tort action recovery. The statutes allowed tort action recovery from local governments for highway defects or for "acts in official capacity". In both cases, the value of the tort claim was limited to $25,000. The bill proposed to increase the limit to $100,000.
A.Amdt.3 proposed to restrict the circumstances authorizing tort actions against local governments. This was not an amendment limiting the scope of the proposal; rather, it substantially expanded the scope by opening up the entire question of tort actions against local governments.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of April 30, 1981 .......... Page: 421
Point of order:
Representative Munts rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 231 [relating to municipal zoning of wetlands within shoreland areas] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] The bill was limited to wetland zoning; A.Amdt.3 proposed to limit to "navigable" streams the existing permit requirement for dredging.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order well taken.
237Assembly Journal of February 12, 1981 .......... Page: 160
Point of order:
