Representative Krug rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 381 [relating to county ordinances that are the same as or similar to state theft, retail theft and battery laws] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3). The speaker took the point of order under advisement.
[Note:] The bill authorized counties to enact ordinances restating state criminal law on battery, theft and retail theft.
A.Sub.Amdt-1 expanded the scope - nongermane under A.Rule 54 (3) (f) - by adding 2 crimes to the 3 enumerated in the proposal: damage to property and resisting or obstructing an officer.
Ruling of the chair [p. 406]:
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled well taken the point of order raised by Representative Krug on Wednesday, October 25 that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 381 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3).
Assembly Journal of October 11, 1989 .......... Page: 348
Point of order:
Representative Barrett rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 433 [relating to the recommendations made by planning councils under the special transfer program to reduce racial imbalance] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3).
583 The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled the point of order well taken.
[Note:] 1989 AB 433 was limited to the deletion of "socioeconomic" factors from the array of factors to be considered by planning councils of Milwaukee county school districts in making recommendations to their respective school boards for pupil transfers from one attendance area to another so as to reduce racial imbalance.
A.Sub.Amdt. 1 did not affect planning council procedures. Instead, the substitute proposed a list of 8 criteria and required that any pupil transferred from one attendance area to another meet at least 3 of the criteria. The substitute was not germane because it totally altered the nature of the proposal.
A.Amdt-1 (below) attempted to add the content of A.Sub.Amdt. 1 to the original bill. Under A.Rule 54 (3) (a), an amendment to add one individual proposition to a different individual proposition is not germane.
Point of order (p. 349):
Representative Barrett rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 433 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3).
The chair ruled the point of order well taken.
1 9 8 7 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of May 19, 1988 .......... Page: 1116
Point of order:
Representative Hauke rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Senate Bill 598 [relating to the homestead credit, farmland preservation credit, school property tax credit, vocational, technical and adult education incentive grants and making an appropriation] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54.
[Note:] The bill proposed to give property tax relief through changes in the school property tax credit, the farmland preservation credit and VTAE incentive grants.
A.SubAmdt.1 proposed a completely different approach to property tax relief by state assumption of teachers' salaries funded by eliminating the school property tax credit and increasing the sales tax from 5% to 6%.
A.Rule 54 (1) identifies as not germane a substitute amendment "which would totally alter the nature of the proposal".
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled the point of order well taken.
Representative Paulson appealed the decision of the chair. The question was: Shall the decision of the chair stand as the decision of the assembly? The roll was taken. [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-61, noes-36] Motion carried.
Assembly Journal of March 15, 1988 .......... Page: 841
Point of order:
584 Representative Clarenbach rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 905 [relating to tuition for undergraduates at the university of Wisconsin system and granting rule-making authority] was not germane under Assembly Rule (54) (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] The bill proposed to create a new statute capping undergraduate tuition at 33% of instructional costs for Wisconsin residents, and at 105% for nonresidents.
A.SubAmdt.1 did not propose either cap. Instead, it would have appropriated one-quarter of the moneys collected by the university for Wisconsin residents in excess of 33% of instructional costs to increase the revenues available for Wisconsin higher education grants under sec. 39.435, stats.
The substitute changed the nature and purpose of the proposal, as prohibited by A.Rule 54 (1).
The speaker [Loftus] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of March 1, 1988 .......... Page: 761
Point of order:
Representative Tesmer rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 683 [relating to extended juvenile court jurisdiction] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (b) and (f) [substantial expansion of scope]. The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] took the point of order under advisement.
585 [Note:] AB 683 removed 12- and 13-year old children adjudged delinquent from extended juvenile court jurisdiction, but retained the mandatory aspect of the extension for the remaining age groups.
Under existing law, because a 12-year old can be adjudged "delinquent", juvenile court jurisdiction was extended to age 21 for children from 12 through 17 years of age who have been convicted of the crimes enumerated in s. 48.366 (1), stats., as created by 1987 WisAct 27, and was extended to age 25 for any such delinquent child convicted of first degree murder. Extended juvenile court jurisdiction was mandatory for the affected age groups.
The purpose of 1987 AB 683 was limited to removing 12- and 13-year olds from extended juvenile court jurisdiction. The nature of the bill was limited to facilitating the proposal's purpose within the mandatory framework.
The substitute amendment set up a procedural framework of petition, notice, hearing and decision - changing the character of extended juvenile court jurisdiction from mandatory to discretionary. This would have changed the nature of the bill.
When extended juvenile court jurisdiction becomes discretionary, the persons excluded from the court's extended jurisdiction comprise not only 12- and 13-year olds adjudged delinquent, but also any 14-year old, 15-year old, 16-year old or 17-year old for whom the court determines "that it is in the best interest of the person and consistent with the protection of the public" not to extend the court's jurisdiction over the person to age 21 (or 25). This changes the purpose of the bill.
In many cases, amendments creating a procedural framework for a program proposed by a bill are held germane to the bill, under Assembly Rule 54 (4) (e), as "relating only to particularized details". The rule does not apply here.
The existing mandatory program of extended juvenile court jurisdiction did not need a procedural framework. The court retained jurisdiction to age 21 (or 25) whenever the criteria set forth in the statute applied.
The procedural framework offered in the substitute amendment was necessary only when the application of extended juvenile court jurisdiction was changed from mandatory to discretionary. Consequently, this procedural framework could not be considered germane particularized detail, but constituted a substantial expansion of the proposal.
Assembly Journal of March 10, 1988 .......... Page: 810
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled well taken the point of order raised by Representative Tesmer on Tuesday, March 1 that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 683 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54.
1 9 8 7 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of March 22, 1988 .......... Page: 748
[Point of order:]
Senator Risser raised the point of order that senate substitute amendment 1 [to Senate Bill 351, relating to emergency detention, involuntary civil commitment, guardianship, protective services, transfer and discharge of involuntarily committed persons, recommitment evaluations, incompetency to refuse medication, emergency protective placement, training in emergency detention and emergency protective placement procedures for law enforcement officers, a presumption of good faith of individuals initiating emergency detentions, codifying a standard of performance for guardians of the person, requiring health insurance coverage of services provided under a court order, requiring the department of health and social services to study the implementation of crisis intervention services, other mental health requirements and granting rule-making authority] is not germane.
Senator Engeleiter asked unanimous consent that senate substitute amendment 1 be returned to the author. Senator Risser objected. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of March 23, 1988 .......... Page: 775
Ruling of the chair:
On Tuesday, March 22, 1988, the Senator from the 26th, Senator Risser raised the point of order that senate substitute amendment 1 to Senate Bill 351 was not germane. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Bill 351 is a comprehensive bill relating to mental health commitment standards and processes, and alternatives thereto. The bill sets standards for commitment, amends current law relating to guardianship and court-ordered protective services, emergency detention, training in emergency procedures, crisis intervention services and coverage of court-ordered services under medical plans.
586 Senate substitute amendment 1 relates solely to commitment and emergency detention of persons based on specific circumstances. The substitute amendment eliminates many of the provisions of the original bill.
Senate Rule 50 (7) reads as follows: "A substitute or amendment relating to a specific subject or to a general class is not germane to a bill relating to a different specific subject, but an amendment limiting the scope of the proposal is germane."
Mason's Manual Section 402 (4) reads as follows: An entirely new proposal may be substituted by amendment so long as it is germane to the main purpose of the original proposal.
It is the opinion of the Chair that the main purpose of the original bill was to set standards for commitment. Therefore, in accordance with Senate Rule 50 (7) and Mason's Manual Section 402 (4), the amendment is germane, and the point of order is not well taken.
Senator Fred A. Risser
President of the Senate
Senate Journal of March 15, 1988 .......... Page: 704
[Point of order:]
Senator Feingold raised the point of order that the amendment [senate substitute amendment 1 to Senate Bill 505, relating to changing the maximum finance charge permitted in certain open-end credit plans that do not use a seller credit card] was not germane.
[Note:] The law provided an annual interest ceiling of 18% for most credit card purchases. SB 505 retained the 18% limit for store credit cards, but proposed to set the interest rate for general credit cards (Visa, Mastercard, etc.) at 7% above the interest rate applicable to 6-month U.S. treasury bills.
S.SubAmdt.1 proposed to deregulate (remove any interest ceiling) all open-ended credit cards.
The Chair [Pres. Risser] ruled the point of order well taken.
Senate Journal of March 10, 1988 .......... Page: 692
[Point of order:]
Senator Davis raised the point of order that senate substitute amendment 2 [to Senate Bill 317, relating to representation of annuitants in the Wisconsin retirement system on the retirement research committee, employe trust funds board and the state investment board] is not germane.
[Note:] SB 317 had a number of purposes, including election of retirement board members representing certain employe groups and repeal of a statute prohibiting certain types of employment by public members.
S.SubAmdt.2 contained most of the provisions of the bill, but did not contain the 2 purposes described. An amendment or substitute that narrows the scope of a proposal is germane.
587 The Chair [Pres. Risser] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Senate Journal of May 12, 1987 .......... Page: 173
[Point of order:]
Senator Te Winkle raised the point of order that senate substitute amendment 1 [to Senate Bill 166, relating to establishing a speed limit of 65 miles per hour for rural interstate highways] was not germane.
[Note:] S.SubAmdt.1 contained the entire text of the original bill and, in addition, proposed an energy conservation program to be financed by a part of the anticipated motor fuel tax revenue increased resulting from the speed limit increase.
The substitute amendment was not one "intended to accomplish a different purpose", nor did it "totally alter the nature of the original proposal"; it satisfied S.Rule 50 (1).
S.SubAmdt.1 may also have satisfied S.Rule 50 (9) in that it contained "new material added which does not affect the subject or purpose" of the bill.
The chair [Sen. Helbach] ruled the point of order not well taken.
1 9 8 5 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of March 13, 1986 .......... Page: 866
Point of order:
Representative Wood rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 216 [relating to a property tax exemption for nonprofit theaters] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3)(f).
[Note:] By proposing an exemption for both nonprofit theaters and "performing arts studios", the substitute amendment substantially expanded the scope of the proposal.
The speaker [Loftus] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of October 18, 1985 .......... Page: 518
Point of order:
Representative Neubauer rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Senate Bill 8, September 1985 Spec. Sess. [relating to making an appropriation for funding for Forward Wisconsin, inc], was not germane under Assembly Rule 54.
588 [Note:] The bill, conforming to item 7 of the special session call (A.Jour. 9/26/85, p. 356), was limited to increasing the state contribution to Forward Wisconsin, inc.
A.Sub.1 proposed to reorganize the state's department of development to obtain, by reduced DOD operations, funds to be allocated to Forward Wisconsin.
The speaker [Loftus] ruled the point of order well taken.
1 9 8 5 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of May 22, 1986 .......... Page: 919
[Point of order:]
Senator Stitt raised the point of order that senate substitute amendment 1 [to Senate Bill 20, May 1986 Spec. Sess., relating to operating motor vehicles, blood alcohol concentration, operating privileges and providing penalties] was not germane.
[Note:] S.Sub.1, offered by the committee to which the bill had been referred, differed from the original only in matters of detail.
The chair [Pres. Risser] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Senate Journal of May 22, 1986 .......... Page: 915
[Point of order:]
Senator Chilsen raised the point of order that senate substitute amendment 1 [to Senate Bill 1, May 1986 Spec. Sess., relating to raising the legal drinking age to 21] was not germane.
The chair [Pres. Risser] ruled the point of order not well taken.
[Note:] Although S.Sub.1 would have permitted certain individuals at least 19 years of age to consume alcohol on certain premises, the overall intent of the substitute amendment was to raise the legal drinking age to 21.
S.Sub.2 [below], on the other hand, would have kept the legal drinking age at 19, requiring the 21-year age only for individuals not in possession of a valid Wisconsin photo ID or driver's license.
[Point of order:]
Senator Chilsen raised the point of order that senate substitute amendment 2 was not germane.
The chair [Pres. Risser] ruled the point of order well taken.
1 9 8 3 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of April 4, 1984 .......... Page: 1145
Point of order:
589 Representative Kunicki rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Senate Bill 485 [relating to health maintenance organizations] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] 1983 Senate Bill 485 dealt only with the operational procedures of HMOs; the A.Sub.1 dealt with required access of certain provider groups - dentists, optometrists, pharmacists, podiatrists - to participation in HMOs, PPOs and cooperative association health care plans. The bill touched cooperative association health care plans only to include them in the definition of HMOs; the amendment covered provider participation in all cooperative association health care plans, PPOs and HMOs.
