Assembly Journal of March 22, 1984 .......... Page: 1036
Point of order:
Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 2 to assembly substitute amendment 2 to Senate Bill 663 [relating to the individual and corporate surtaxes, the homestead credit, the required general fund balance, reducing the bonding authority for highway projects, income tax exemptions, income and franchise tax deductions for intercorporate dividends and for insurers' loss carry-backs, property tax statements, the definition of the internal revenue code for purposes of the income, franchise, inheritance and minimum taxes, required health insurance coverage, income tax exemptions, utility taxes on telephone companies, decreasing the primary guaranteed valuation, providing penalties and making an appropriation] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] A.Amdt.2 to A.Sub.2 related to the corporate income tax deduction for contributions to deferred payment plans.
A contribution made on or before the last day for filing was deemed made on the last day of the tax year for the return.
The speaker took the point of order under advisement.
221Assembly Journal of March 22, 1984 .......... Page: 1037
The speaker [Loftus] ruled that assembly amendment 2 to assembly substitute amendment 2 to Senate Bill 663 was not germane. The point of order raised by Representative Johnson was ruled well taken.
Assembly Journal of March 21, 1984 .......... Page: 1005
Point of order:
Representative Potter rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to Senate Bill 281 [relating to authorizing credit unions to act as depositories for public funds and designating the higher education corporation as a public depositor] was not germane under Assembly Rule (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] A.Amdt.1 directed the commissioner of credit unions, together with the departments of justice and administration, to prepare draft legislation authorizing the conversion of credit unions into state-chartered banks.
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of March 20, 1984 .......... Page: 995
Point of order:
Representative Wood rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 1063 [relating to interest and penalties on income taxes due on renewable energy resource system refunds] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] This was a very narrow bill to exclude from interest and penalty assessment any income tax due on renewable energy resource system refunds received through taxable year 1982.
A.Amdt.1 proposed to exempt from income tax, forever, all such refunds received.
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of March 20, 1984 .......... Page: 979
Point of order:
Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to Senate Bill 663 [relating to the individual and corporate surtaxes, the homestead credit, the required general fund balance, reducing the bonding authority for highway projects, income tax exemptions, income and franchise tax deductions for intercorporate dividends and for insurers' loss carry-backs, property tax statements, the definition of the internal revenue code for purposes of the income, franchise, inheritance and minimum taxes, required health insurance coverage, income tax exemptions, utility taxes on telephone companies, decreasing the primary guaranteed valuation, providing penalties and making an appropriation] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
222 [Note:] Does any multi-issue bill set its own "special session" environment? In a special session, the Legislature is free to treat any of the issues raised by the Governor by doing nothing, but it cannot treat additional unrelated issues. For a multi-issue bill, this might mean that amendments to delete the treatment of individual separable issues are germane, but that amendments to ingraft additional unrelated issues are not germane.
The legislative rules on germaneness of amendments derive from long-term experience with single issue bills. They really do not address the special germaneness questions raised by multi-issue bills. It is likely that multi-issue bills to adjust the state's budget and revenues will be introduced for many sessions to come.
The biennial budget bill, though a multi-issue bill, holds a special status under law and legislative rule (shared, until 1981, by the biennial "budget review bill"), and germaneness rules have not been strictly applied.
The speaker [Loftus] took the point of order under advisement [see p. 983, below. Intervening text omitted.]
Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 2 to Senate Bill 663 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
The speaker took the point of order under advisement [see p. 982, below. Intervening text omitted.]
Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 4 to Senate Bill 663 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
The speaker ruled the point of order well taken. [Intervening text omitted.]
Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 5 to Senate Bill 663 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
The speaker ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of March 20, 1984 .......... Page: 980
[Intervening text omitted.]
Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 7 to Senate Bill 663 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
The speaker ruled the point of order well taken. [Intervening text omitted.]
Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 3 to Senate Bill 663 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
The speaker ruled the point of order well taken. [Intervening text omitted.]
Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 11 to Senate Bill 663 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
The speaker ruled the point of order well taken. [Intervening text omitted.]
Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 12 to Senate Bill 663 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
The speaker ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of March 20, 1984 .......... Page: 982
[Ruling on the point of order:]
The speaker ruled well taken the points of order on the germaneness of assembly amendments 2 and 14 [?] to Senate Bill 663.
Assembly Journal of March 20, 1984 .......... Page: 983
[Ruling on the point of order:]
223 The speaker ruled the point of order on assembly amendment 1 to Senate Bill 663 well taken.
Assembly Journal of March 20, 1984 .......... Page: 984
Point of order:
Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 24 to Senate Bill 663 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
The speaker ruled the point of order well taken.
Point of order:
Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 23 to Senate Bill 663 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
The speaker [Loftus] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of March 13, 1984 .......... Page: 933
Point of order:
Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 19 to senate substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 200 [relating to establishing a system of marital property shared by husband and wife and providing penalties] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope]. The speaker took the point of order under advisement. [Intervening text omitted.]
[Note:] The 1983 Legislature considered inheritance tax relief for "lineal issue" (children) in SB 194, SB 433, SB 664, AB 349, AB 356 and AB 1152.
A.Amdt.19 to the marital property act proposed a complete tax exemption for lineal issue inheritances.
The speaker [Loftus] ruled the point of order, that assembly amendment 19 to senate substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 200, was not germane well taken.
Assembly Journal of March 7, 1984 .......... Page: 891
Point of order:
Representative Neubauer rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 82 to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 595 [relating to groundwater management, creating a council, granting rule-making authority, imposing penalties and making appropriations] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
Representative Swoboda asked unanimous consent that assembly amendment 82 to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 595 be placed after assembly amendment 89 to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 595. Granted.
Assembly Journal of March 7, 1984 .......... Page: 893
Point of order:
Representative Munts rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 89 to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 595 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f). The speaker took the point of order under advisement. [Recess to 10:50 p.m.]
224 [Note:] A.Amdt.82 shortened by one year the trial period for an alternative private sewage system ("mound" system).
A.Amdt.89 repealed the 7/1/85 ending date for the mound system trial period, making mound system authorization permanent, and repealed the restrictions limiting the number of such systems in each county.
The speaker [Loftus] ruled that assembly amendments 89 and 82 to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 595 were not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
Assembly Journal of March 7, 1984 .......... Page: 872
Point of order:
Representative Robinson rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 602 [relating to requiring counties to provide sanitarian services] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope]. The speaker took the point of order under advisement.
[Note:] 1983 AB 602, developed and introduced by the Legislative Council, dealt with only one issue: requiring "counties to provide sanitarian services". A.Sub.1 dealt with 2 separable issues which, though related, were not so interrelated that one could not be treated without treating the other. The first issue was the same as the bill but the scope was limited to "counties having a population of 200,000 or more". The 2nd issue (identical to 1983 AB 835) authorized "town boards of health to perform additional functions".
While restricting of the proposed sanitarian issue to populous counties would be germane under A.Rule 54 (4) (c) [limiting scope of proposal], the ingrafting of the town boards of health issue was not germane under A.Rule 54 (3) (a) [one individual proposition amending another] and (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
S.Rule 50 (6), which corresponds to A.Rule 54 (3) (a), states that an amendment is not germane when it ingrafts one proposal pending before the Senate into the proposal under current consideration.
Assembly Journal of March 27, 1984 .......... Page: 1048
The speaker [Loftus] ruled the point of order raised by Representative Robinson on March 7, 1984, that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 602 was not germane well taken.
Assembly Journal of March 1, 1984 .......... Page: 837
Point of order:
Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 9 to Senate Bill 568 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope] because there were no provisions relating to venture capital in Senate Bill 568 [relating to retirement benefits and funding those benefits].
The speaker [Loftus] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of February 29, 1984 .......... Page: 811
Point of order:
225 Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 2 to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 833 [relating to hearing requirements prior to removing or causing, ordering or authorizing the removal of a dam] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] The bill and A.Sub.1 dealt exclusively with hearing requirements. A.Amdt.2 dealt with the transfer of a permit to own or operate a dam.
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of February 23, 1984 .......... Page: 774
Point of order:
Representative Tesmer rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 9 to Assembly Bill 571 [relating to reporting and investigating abuse or neglect of elder persons, making an appropriation and providing penalties] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3).
[Note:] In the simplest view, A.Amdt.9 was not germane under A.Rule 54 (1) because it had to insert the following words into the bill title to reflect the content of the amendment: "increasing the amounts allocated for adjustments to the basic community aids allocation to counties".
Any argument that the "basic community aids allocation" had to be adjusted if AB 571 was enacted into law, and that A.Amdt.9 provided this required adjustment, probably fell on 2 grounds:
(1) As shown by the fiscal estimate to AB 571 prepared by Michael Fox of the Division of Community Services on 9/14/83 (see page 2 of "assumptions"), enacting AB 571 would result in about 100 additional cases at $500/year, for a statewide cost of $50,000. That amount had little relation to the roughly $700,000/year proposed for reallocation by A.Amdt.9.
(2) A.Amdt.9 amended subd. 2 of 1983 WisAct 27, SECTION 2020 (6) (a). Subdivision 1 of that session law identified only 2 statute sections - 49.52 (1) (d) and 51.42 (8) (b) - under which such funds are reallocated. Nothing in 1983 AB 571 related to those 2 sections of the statutes.
A.Amdt.9 was not germane because it expanded the scope of the proposal in violation of A.Rule 54 (3) (f).
The speaker [Loftus] ruled the point of order well taken because the amendment added new appropriations to the bill.
Assembly Journal of October 20, 1983 .......... Page: 482
Point of order:
226 Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 12 to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 260 [relating to official identification cards, changing the legal drinking age, establishing a curfew and creating and changing penalties] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] A.Amdt.12 prohibited carry-out sales to persons aged 19 or 20.
