By request of Senator Berger, with unanimous consent, his point of order relative to Assembly Bill 381 was withdrawn.
Point of order under advisement: business before house
1 9 8 7 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of October 21, 1987 .......... Page: 422
[Precedence of appeal:]
Senator Strohl asked unanimous consent that Assembly Bill 462 [relating to the Wisconsin retirement system, allowing retired public employes to purchase state group health insurance coverage, fixed retirement investment trusts, transferring funds and making an appropriation] be laid on the table.
Senator Davis objected. Senator Davis appealed the ruling of the chair [given immediately preceding the unanimous consent request].
Senator Strohl moved that Assembly Bill 462 be laid on the table.
[Point of order:]
Senator Ellis raised the point of order that the motion of Senator Strohl was not timely. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of October 27, 1987 .......... Page: 453
Ruling of the chair:
480 On Wednesday, October 21, 1987, the senator from the 19th, Senator Ellis, raised the point of order that a motion to appeal the decision of the Chair takes precedence over the motion to table a proposal.
The senator from the 21st, Senator Strohl, had the floor after the Chair had ruled on a pending point of order in relating to Assembly Bill 462. The senator
from the 21st asked unanimous consent that the bill be laid on the table. An objection was heard. The senator was then going to move to lay the bill on the table, when he yielded to the senator from the 11th, Senator Davis, who then appealed the ruling of the Chair. The senator from the 21st then moved to table the bill.
Section 230, (7) of Mason's Manual of Legislative Procedure reads as follows: "When an appeal has been taken from a decision of the presiding officer, no new business is in order until the appeal has been disposed of."
The motion to appeal is an incidental question relating to the general procedural nature of the senate. Therefore, it takes precedence over any main motion relating to the matter under consideration.
Therefore, it is the opinion of the Chair that the motion to appeal the decision of the Chair takes precedence over the motion to table, and the point of order raised by the senator from the 19th is well taken.
Senator Fred A. Risser
President of the Senate
1 9 8 1 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of February 23, 1982 .......... Page: 2346
[Background: following the introduction of assembly amendment 8 to assembly substitute amendment 2 to Assembly Bill 452 "relating to employment relations in higher education and making an appropriation", a call was imposed on the question of tabling AB 452. When the motion to lift that call had failed (A.Jour., p. 2344), the assembly acted on SB 163 and began consideration of SB 450.]
Point of order:
Representative Jackamonis rose to the point of order that, under Assembly Rule 86 (1), the question before the assembly should be adoption of assembly amendment 8 to assembly substitute amendment 2 to Assembly Bill 452 because the call of the assembly was only on the specific question of tabling Assembly Bill 452 and that did not preclude consideration of other questions on the bill.
[Procedural point:] Representative Thompson rose to the point of order that the point of order raised by Representative Jackamonis was not timely under Assembly Rule 62 (4) [timely only if raised before question is decided]. The chair [Rep. Clarenbach] ruled the point of order not well taken.
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach] ruled well taken the point of order raised by Representative Jackamonis that the next question before the assembly should be the adoption of assembly amendment 8 to assembly substitute amendment 2 to Assembly Bill 452.
1 9 8 1 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of June 12, 1982 .......... Page: 2237
Point of order:
481 Senator Chilsen raised the point of order that the time limit for the president to rule on the point of order raised by the Senator from the 15th, Senator Cullen, has expired. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of June 14, 1982 .......... Page: 2240
Ruling of the chair [Pres. Risser]:
On Saturday, June 12, the Senator from the 29th, Senator Chilsen, raised the point of order that the time limit for the president to rule on a point of order raised by the Senator from the 15th, Senator Cullen, on Thursday, June 10, had expired. The chair took Senator Chilsen's point of order under advisement.
The chair reviewed the Journal of the Senate from the time the original point of order was raised and would like to draw the attention of the body to the fact that the chair has not had an opportunity to present his decision until this morning, because the senate has by unanimous consent recessed or adjourned or not had a quorum present to transact business.
Since the chair has ruled, it is the opinion of the chair that the point of order raised by the Senator from the 29th, Senator Chilsen is moot.
Senate Journal of March 31, 1982 .......... Page: 1914
Point of order:
The question was: Shall Senate Bill 806 be withdrawn from committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources and taken up at this time?
Senator Bablitch moved that the motion to withdraw Senate Bill 806 from committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources and taken up at this time be laid on the table.
Senator Goyke raised the point of order that the motion to suspend the rules is not subject to motion to table. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of April 2, 1982 .......... Page: 1972
Point of order:
Senator Opitz raised the point of order that pursuant to Senate Rule 7 (2) the chair was required to rule on the Point of Order raised March 31, 1982. The chair took the point of order under advisement. [No ruling given.]
1 9 7 9 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of June 21, 1979 .......... Page: 549
[Point of order:]
Senator Lorge raised the point of order that senate substitute amendment 1 to Senate Bill 19 [relating to raising the drinking age to 19 and providing a penalty] was not germane.
Senator Kleczka asked unanimous consent that the bill be referred to joint committee on Finance. Senator Lorge objected.
Senator Bablitch moved that the rules be suspended and the bill be referred to joint committee on Finance.
[Point of order:]
482 Senator Lorge raised the point of order that the chair took his point of order under advisement, that the bill is in the possession of the chair and, therefore, that the motion to
suspend the rules and refer the bill to the joint committee on Finance is not proper. The chair took both points of order by Senator Lorge under advisement.
[Note:] Original 1979 SB 19 was a 13-page bill to increase the drinking age from 18 to 19. S.Sub.1 (23 pages) contained several related provisions concerning alcohol abuse by minors, and contained a 10 cents per 31-gallon barrel increase in the beer tax.
Senate Journal of June 21, 1979 .......... Page: 551
The chair [Pres. Risser] ruled that senate substitute amendment 1 to Senate Bill 19 is germane. With that decision the question of suspending the rules is moot and the point of order raised by Senator Lorge in reference to suspending the rules is moot.
At the time the point of order was raised there was a unanimous consent request by Senator Kleczka that the bill be referred to joint committee on Finance. Senator Lorge objected.
Senator Kleczka moved that Senate Bill 19 be referred to joint committee on Finance.
1 9 7 5 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of March 10, 1976 .......... Page: 3256
Point of order:
Representative Tropman rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 1067 [relating to the licensing of medical practitioners, creating a council on physicians' assistants, granting rule-making authority and providing a penalty] was not germane under Assembly Rule 55. The speaker took the point of order under advisement. [AA-4 and AA-5, also pending, considered. Then:]
The assembly proceeded to the next bill pending the ruling on the point of order on assembly amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 1067.
[Note:] In the 1979 adoption of the rules (A.Res. 7) this procedure was codified in the following rule:
"All points of order involving amendments, or amendments to amendments, must be disposed of before the assembly proceeds to any question of lesser precedence".
Assembly Journal of March 10, 1976 .......... Page: 3266
The speaker [Anderson] ruled the point of order on assembly amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 1067 not well taken.
483Point of order under advisement: timeliness of ruling
1 9 7 5 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of February 17, 1976 .......... Page: 1737
[Point of order:]
Senator Sensenbrenner raised the point of order that Senate Bill 227 should be before the senate at this time. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of February 24, 1976 .......... Page: 1797
On February 17, 1976, Senator Sensenbrenner raised the point of order that the required time for the presiding officer to rule on the point of order raised on February 4, 1976, relating to Senate Bill 227, has expired and the bill should be before the senate at this time.
The chair rules that under Senate Rule 7 (2), the point of order is well taken.
Respectfully submitted,
FRED A. RISSER
President pro tempore
1 9 7 3 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of May 15, 1974 .......... Page: 87
[Senate Bill 5, (Spring 1974) Special Session, relating to regulation of elections and campaign contributions and expenditures, providing for public financing of certain political campaigns, granting rule-making authority, providing penalties and making appropriations.]
[Point of order:]
Senator Dorman raised the point of order that senate amendment 3 was not germane. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of May 15, 1974 .......... Page: 87
[Subsequent action:]
Senator Petri called the chair's attention to senate amendment 3 which had been under advisement by the chair on a point of order. As the chair had not made a ruling within an hour, the question should be submitted to the body pursuant to the rules.
The chair submitted the question to the body.
The question was: is senate amendment 3 germane?
Senate amendment 3 was considered germane.
Senate Journal of October 2, 1973 .......... Page: 1575
[Point of order:]
[On 10/2/73, the Senate was on the calendar for 5/11/73.] Senate Resolution 19, "to amend senate rule 7 (2), relating to the time for rendering a decision on points of order taken under advisement". Read.
484 Senator Keppler raised the point of order that Senate Resolution 19, pursuant to senate rule 90, was not properly taken up earlier. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of October 2, 1973 .......... Page: 1581
