Assembly Journal of April 10, 1975 .......... Page: 487
Point of order:
Representative Hanson moved that the rules be suspended and that assembly amendments 5 to 41 [to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 48; relating to regulation of buying clubs or plans and providing penalties] be laid on the table.
Representative Ferrall rose to the point of order that the motion was not in order under Assembly Rule 72.
The chair ruled the point of order not well taken.
1 9 7 5 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of February 4, 1975 .......... Page: 218
[Point of order:]
Senator Chilsen moved that the rules be suspended and Senate Joint Resolution 14 be withdrawn from committee on Senate Organization and considered for action at this time.
Senator Whittow asked unanimous consent that the motion to withdraw Senate Joint Resolution 14 from committee be laid on the table. Senator Chilsen objected.
Senator Whittow moved that the motion to withdraw Senate Joint Resolution 14 from committee be laid on the table.
Senator Knowles raised the point of order that a motion to suspend rules takes precedence over a motion to table and therefore a move to table would be out of order. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of February 5, 1975 .......... Page: 231
As it relates to the point of order raised by Senator Knowles on February 4, the chair [Lt.Gov. Schreiber] ruled the point of order well taken as a motion to suspend rules may not have any subsidiary motions appended to it, or come before it. Therefore, pursuant to Mason's Manual Section 238 Paragraph 6, a motion to table a suspension of the rules would be out of order.
630Senate Journal of January 22, 1975 .......... Page: 140
[Point of order:]
Senator Murphy moved that Senate Resolution 3 be taken from the table and considered for action at this time.
Senator Risser raised the point of order that the senate was not under the proper order of business to receive motions.
The chair [Lt.Gov. Schreiber] ruled the point of order well taken. [Intervening text omitted.]
Senator Knowles raised the point of order that pursuant to senate rule 65 a motion to take from the table is in order at any time. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of February 4, 1975 .......... Page: 216
On Wednesday, January 22, 1975, during the 10th order of business the Senator from the 33rd made a motion that Senate Resolution 3 be taken from the table.
The chair ruled that motion out of order ruling that said motion should be appropriately made under the eighth order of business.
Just prior to adjournment on said day the Senator from the 10th rose to a point of order on the chair's ruling citing Senate Rule 65.
(1) A motion to lay on the table shall only have the effect of disposing of the matter temporarily and it may be taken from the table at any time by order of the Senate.
The question is simply, can a bill or resolution be taken from the table at any time?
Senate Rule 65 when read in its entirety furnished the guidance needed for the decision on this appeal.
(2) A motion to lay a bill or resolution on the table shall, if approved, have the effect of returning the matter to the committee on senate organization.
(3) A motion to remove a bill or resolution from the table shall, if approved, have the effect of withdrawing the matter from the committee on senate organization and placing it on the calendar.
Under the Senate Rule 65 (2) a motion to table a bill or resolution is not really a motion to table in the traditional sense but actually is a motion with the effect of "returning the matter to the committee on senate organization." [See also Senate Rule 63 (1)(f)].
Under Senate Rule 65 (3) a motion to remove a bill or resolution from the table is not really a motion to remove from the table in the traditional sense, but actually a motion with the effect of "withdrawing the matter from the committee on senate organization and placing it on the calendar."
The "and it may be taken from the table at any time" language of Senate Rule 65 (1), because of the explicit language in (2) and (3) becomes inoperative when a tabling motion involves "placing" or "taking" a bill or resolution from the table.
A motion to take a bill or resolution from committee or remove a bill or resolution from the table cannot be made at any time but must be made under the appropriate order of business pursuant to the rules.
The point of order is not well taken.
Respectfully submitted
MARTIN J. SCHREIBER
Lieutenant Governor
Senate Journal of March 28, 1974 .......... Page: 2628
[Point of order:]
[Assembly Bill 1511, "relating to a tax on copper mining".] Read first time and laid on the table.
Senator Keppler raised the point of order that the chair must refer the assembly bills on the message to some committee.
The chair referred the bill to the committee on Natural Resources.
Senate Journal of February 21, 1974 .......... Page: 2253
[Withdraw and table as alternative to withdraw and refer to calendar:]
Senator Parys moved that Assembly Bill 934 be withdrawn from the committee on Industry, Labor, Taxation and Banking and laid on the table.
[Point of order:]
Senator Chilsen raised the point of order that the motion to withdraw from committee and lay on the table was a suspension of the rules and required a two-thirds vote.
The chair [Lt.Gov. Schreiber] ruled the point of order not well taken. A two-thirds vote would be required, only if an attempt were made to take from the table and consider for action, within the next two days.
Senate Journal of January 30, 1974 .......... Page: 2062
[Tabling of bills en masse permitted]
Senator Parys moved that the remaining assembly bills on the October 12th calendar be laid on the table.
Senator Risser moved a call of the senate. [Display of roll call omitted; present-30, absent-0, with leave-3]
Senator Risser requested a division of the question.
Senator Keppler moved that the assembly bills to be laid on the table be voted upon en masse.
Senator Risser raised the point of order that the rules could be suspended on individual bills but not on bills en masse.
The chair [Lt.Gov. Schreiber] ruled the point of order not well taken. [Intervening text omitted.]
By request of Senator Parys, with unanimous consent, he withdrew his motion to lay the assembly bills from the calendar of October 12 on the table.
Senate Journal of October 25, 1973 .......... Page: 1868
[Suspension of rules cannot be tabled:]
Senator Thompson moved that Senate Bill 732 be ordered immediately messaged.
Senator Steinhilber moved that the motion to immediately message be laid on the table.
[Point of order:]
Senator Chilsen raised the point of order that a motion to suspend the rules cannot be laid on the table.
632 The chair [Lt.Gov. Schreiber] ruled the point of order well taken.
Senate Journal of July 24, 1973 .......... Page: 1408
[Motion for previous question tabled:]
Assembly Bill 300 [relating to state finances and appropriations constituting the executive budget bill of the 1973 legislature, and making appropriations]
The question was: Adoption of the Committee of Conference report?
Senator J. D. Swan moved rejection of the Committee of Conference report. [Intervening text omitted.]
The question was: Adoption of the Conference Committee Report? Senator J. D. Swan moved rejection.
The ayes and noes were demanded and the vote was: [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-17, noes-10.] So the motion prevailed.
Senator LaFave moved reconsideration of the vote by which the Conference Committee Report on Assembly Bill 300 was rejected. [Intervening text omitted.]
The question was: Reconsideration of the vote by which the Conference Committee Report on Assembly Bill 300 was rejected?
Senator Lorge moved the previous question.
By request of Senator Johnson, with unanimous consent, the motion to put the previous question was laid on the table.
The question was: Reconsideration of the vote by which the Conference Committee Report on Assembly Bill 300 was rejected.
Senator Risser moved a call of the senate [Display of roll call omitted; present-29, absent-0, with leave-4; intervening text omitted.]
The question was: Reconsideration of the vote by which the Conference Committee Report on Assembly Bill 300 was rejected?
The ayes and noes were demanded and the vote was: [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-13, noes-12.] So the motion prevailed.
Senate Journal of June 7, 1973 .......... Page: 1202
[Tabling: motion may be applied to appointment]
By request of Senator Johnson, with unanimous consent, the appointment of Roland B. Day was taken from the committee on Health, Education and Welfare and considered for action at this time.
DAY, ROLAND B., of Madison, as a member of the University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents, to succeed David Carley, for the remainder of the unexpired term ending May 1, 1974.
The question was: Confirmation?
Senator Parys asked unanimous consent that the appointment of Roland B. Day be laid on the table. Senator Risser objected.
Senator Parys moved that the appointment of Roland B. Day be laid on the table.
Senator Risser raised the point of order that appointments must either be confirmed or rejected and not tabled.
The chair [Lt.Gov. Schreiber] ruled the point of order not well taken.
633 The ayes and noes were demanded and the vote was: [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-6, noes-26.] So the motion did not prevail.
The question was: Confirmation? The ayes and noes were required and the vote was: [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-28, noes-4.] So the appointment was confirmed.
