Representative Prosser rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 590 [relating to excepting food product donors from civil liability] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope]. The speaker took the point of order under advisement.
Assembly Journal of October 21, 1981 .......... Page: 1364
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 590 was germane under Assembly Rule 54 (4) (b) [same purpose accomplished in different manner] and (e) [particularized detail] and the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of April 14, 1981 .......... Page: 359
Point of order:
389 Representative Kirby rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 33 [relating to increasing the maximum length of vehicles and providing a penalty] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] The original bill, in 3 SECTIONS, increased the authorized length for single vehicles from 35 feet to 40 feet.
The substitute retained the treatment of the 3 statutes and, in addition, made a change in the statute requiring red marking (flag or lantern)
whenever a load "or fixture" extends more than 4 feet beyond the body of the truck.
The substitute added "particularized detail" as authorized by A.Rule 54 (4) (c).
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of February 19, 1981 .......... Page: 217
Point of order:
Representative Shoemaker rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to Assembly Resolution 11 [relating to urging congress to continue the dairy price support program at 80% of parity] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] The resolution was concerned with dairy price supports and urged congress to continue that program at 80% of parity. The amendment added "unless tobacco price supports are eliminated".
The amendment did not urge congress to continue, or to discontinue, tobacco price supports (which might have expanded the scope of the resolution). Rather, it used elimination of tobacco price supports as a condition for withdrawing Wisconsin support for 80% dairy parity.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order not well taken.
1 9 8 1 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of March 31, 1982 .......... Page: 1906
Point of order:
Senator Hanaway raised the point of order that senate amendment 1 [to Assembly Bill 976, relating to printing and distribution of certain elections forms, supplies, bulletins and information and publication of certain elections notices by the elections board and making an appropriation] was not germane. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
390 [Note:] 1981 AB 976 changed a number of elections laws to as to achieve a mandated 8% expenditure reduction in election administration costs.
S.Amdt.1 looked suspicious because it added 19 pages of new material to the 7-page bill, but its contents was limited to the technical and minor substantive changes required to achieve the bill's objective.
Senate Journal of March 31, 1982 .......... Page: 1907
The chair [Pres. Risser] ruled that senate amendment 1 was germane and therefore the point of order raised by the senator from the 2nd, Senator Hanaway, was not well taken.
Senate Journal of March 9, 1982 .......... Page: 1659
Point of order:
Senator Offner raised the point of order that senate substitute amendment 2 to Senate Bill 407 was not germane.
[Note:] In its central provision, the original bill provided for a homeownership mortgage loan program, to be administred by the department of development.
S.Sub.2 served the same purpose, but placed administration into the Wisconsin housing finance authority.
Under S.Rule 50 (9), "new material added which does not affect the subject or purpose" of the proposal is a matter of detail and is germane.
The chair [Pres. Risser] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Senate Journal of October 6, 1981 .......... Page: 852
Point of order:
Senator Adelman raised the point of order that senate amendment 2 to senate 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. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of October 6, 1981 .......... Page: 858
Ruling of the chair [Pres. Risser]:
Earlier today, Senator Adelman raised the point of order that senate amendment 2 to senate substitute amendment 1 to Senate Bill 250 was not germane.
The bill relates generally to access to public records. Senate amendment 2, while dealing primarily with records of a certain type (those retrievable by use of an individuals name or other identifying characteristic), is also generally related to public records access.
The amendment relates to maintenance of records: what records may be maintained, how access to records may be gained, and how challenges to the accuracy of records may be made.
In regulating the maintenance of records, it also affects access to them.
A similar amendment was adopted by this body last session to an almost identical bill. A point of order was not raised at that time. It is the opinion of the chair that the question of germaneness is a close one. Therefore, the chair will rule the amendment germane and the point of order not well taken.
The body may reject the amendment and have the same effect of ruling it out of order.
391 1 9 7 9 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of February 21, 1980 .......... Page: 2329
Point of order:
Representative Wagner rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 5 to Assembly Bill 367 [relating to increasing marriage license application and related fees] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (e) because it negates the effect of assembly amendment 4.
[Note:] The bill proposed to increase the fee for a marriage license from $4.50 to $9.50 without changing the state share ($1.50 per license). A.Amdt.4, which was adopted, authorized each county to set its own fee subject to a $9.50 maximum and the $1.50 state share.
Since it accepted marriage license fees set by county boards, A.Amdt 5 did not negate AA-4. A.Amdt.5 dealt only with the detail of county board fee setting (eliminate $9.50 maximum, $1.50 state share).
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of January 22, 1980 .......... Page: 1864
Point of order:
Representative Ferrall rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 966 [relating to creating a department of energy, and a division of public utility consumer affairs in the department of justice, reorganizing the public service commission and state energy functions, granting rule-making authority, making appropriations and providing a penalty] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (c) [misprint: (f)?] because it related to
selection of members of the public service commission. The speaker took the point of order under advisement.
Assembly Journal of January 24, 1980 .......... Page: 1945
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled well taken the point of order raised by Representative Ferrall that assembly substitute amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 966 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
Assembly Journal of January 23, 1980 .......... Page: 1882
Point of order:
Representative Hauke rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 2 to senate substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 8 [relating to battery to persons 62 years of age or older and providing a penalty] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (1).
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order well taken.
392 [Note:] As returned by the Senate, 1979 AB 8 adhered to the original intent of changing battery to a person over 62 from a Class A misdemeanor to a Class E felony.
A.Amdt.2 (above) expanded the scope and purpose of the proposal by making every battery involving a high probability of great bodily harm a Class E felony.
A.Amdt.4 (below) retained the entire Senate version, but added a mandatory 1-year prison term [particularized detail].
Assembly Journal of January 23, 1980 .......... Page: 1884
Point of order:
Representative Hauke rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 4 to senate substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 8 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope] because it includes mandatory minimum sentencing.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of April 26, 1979 .......... Page: 457
Point of order:
Representative Tuczynski rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 3 to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 40 [relating to
restricting the pay of a public employe receiving a retirement benefit from a public employe retirement system, granting rule-making authority ....] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (b) and (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] Both the bill, and A.Sub.1, vested rule-making authority in the secretary of employe trust funds subject to the then established procedures under ch. 227, stats.
A.Amdt.3 proposed for such rules the administrative rules review and clearinghouse procedure later enacted as part of Chap. 34, Laws of 1979 (budget act).
The chair [Rep. Kirby] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of February 27, 1979 .......... Page: 215
Point of order:
Representative Lallensack rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 46 [relating to increasing the ceiling on the public debt for veterans' mortgage loans and making an appropriation] was not germane under Assembly Rule 50 because the constitutional amendment providing for public debt for veterans' housing which was approved by the people in April 1975 (Wis. Constitution Article VIII, Sections 3 and 7) provided for general obligation bonding and not revenue bonding as contained in the substitute amendment.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order not well taken because amendments to bills are not required to be germane to the constitution. He also ruled: 1) the substitution of revenue bonding for general obligation bonding was a matter of particularized details and not one individual proposition amending another, 2) the substitute was intended to accomplish the same purpose in a different manner, and 3) the scope of the proposal was not expanded by changing the amount of the appropriation.
393Germaneness: repealer bill (amendment to)
1 9 9 3 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of January 25, 1994 .......... Page: 554
Point of order:
Representative Wood rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 836 [relating to the requirement that an effective recycling
program include volume-based solid waste fees] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (d).
[Note:] A.Amdt-1 proposed to postpone the application of the existing statute from the effective date of the bill until 1997. Inasmuch as the bill was a one-line repealer of the existing statute, the amendment was clearly not germane.
There may have been some confusion because A.Rule 54 (4) (f) allows amending a repealer bill so as to delay the effective date of the repeal.
The chair (Speaker pro tempore Carpenter) ruled the point of order well taken.
1 9 9 3 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of January 26, 1993 .......... Page: 41
[Point of order:]
Senator Adelman raised the point of order that the amendment [Senate amendment 1 to Senate Bill 1, "relating to deleting the advisory referenda questions on gambling from the April 6, 1993, spring election ballot"] was not germane.
394 [Note:] By Section 9m of 1991 WisAct 321, the 1991 legislature had placed 5 advisory referenda concerning gambling on the 1993 spring election ballot. Of these, the first 3 concerned forms of gambling not permitted by law: 1) riverboat gambling; 2) casino gambling; and 3) video poker and other forms of video gambling. The remaining 2 asked the voters whether they favored continuing two of the forms of gambling specifically authorized by the constitution: 4) pari-mutuel on-track betting on races; and 5) continuing to allow the state-operated lottery. Senate Bill 1 proposed to remove all 5 questions from the ballot.
At the same time, the 1991 legislature gave first consideration approval to a constitutional amendment strictly defining the types of gambling permitted as part of the state lottery. The 1993 legislature agreed on 2nd consideration (Enrolled Joint Resolution 3), placing the constitutional amendment also on the April 1993 spring election ballot.
Senate amendment 1 to 1993 Senate Bill 1 did not propose to amend any of the 5 questions to be repealed. Rather, senate amendment 1 limited the scope of the proposal by removing only the first 3 questions (gambling expansion) from the ballot, and retaining the last 2 (continuation of gambling authorized by the constitution).
An amendment limiting the scope of the proposal from a 5-item repeal to a 3-item repeal was arguably germane under S.Rule 50 (7).
The Chair [President Risser] ruled the point not well taken.
{{{{{{{{{{{{{ 1 9 9 1 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of March 12, 1991 .......... Page: 103
Point of order:
Representative Black rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 10 [relating to requests for increased appropriations to state agencies] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (d).
[Note:] The original bill was a 1-line repealer of the "gag rule" statute, s. 19.45 (12): "No agency .... or officer or employe thereof may present any request, or knowingly utilize any interests outside the agency to present any request, to either house of the legislature or any member or committee thereof, for appropriations which exceed the amount requested by the agency in the agency's most recent [budget] request"....
Under A.Rule 54 (4) (f), an amendment that "reduces the scope of a repeal" is germane. Thus, in theory it would be germane to replace the repeal of a general prohibition with a prohibition limited to one or more specific classes.
A.Amdt-1 to 1991 AB 10 did not fit A.Rule 54 (4) (f). The amendment replaced the repeal of the statute with a "repeal and recreate" which, while retaining the general prohibition, added 4 exceptions leaving it doubtful that the prohibition could still be applied under any circumstances.
An amendment "amending a statute or session law" is not germane "when the purpose of the proposal is limited to repealing such law"; A.Rule 54 (3) (d).
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled the point of order well taken.
1 9 8 3 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of April 6, 1984 .......... Page: 1198