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.
Senate Journal of April 12, 1973 .......... Page: 791
[Point of order:]
Senator Murphy moved that Senate Joint Resolution 38 [declaring April 16, 1973, as Wisconsin Tax Action Day] be laid on the table. The motion prevailed.
The question on which the call of the senate was put having been disposed of the call was raised.
Senator LaFollette moved that Senate Joint Resolution 38 be taken from the table and considered for action at this time.
Senator Lorge raised the point of order that the motion to take from the table was not in order.
The chair [Lt.Gov. Schreiber] ruled the point of order not well taken.
The ayes and noes were demanded and the vote was: [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-19, noes-11.] So the motion prevailed.
Senate Journal of February 15, 1973 .......... Page: 434
[Point of order:]
Senator Risser moved that Assembly Joint Resolution 21 be considered for final action at this time.
Senator Johnson moved that the motion to suspend the rules and give Assembly Joint Resolution 21 its third reading be laid on the table.
Senator Risser moved a call of the senate. [Record of senate omitted; present-29, absent with leave-4.]
Senator Risser raised the point of order that a motion to suspend the rules cannot be laid on the table.
The chair [Lt.Gov. Schreiber] ruled the point of order well taken. The ayes and noes were required and the vote was: [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-11, noes-18.] Less than two-thirds having voted in the affirmative the motion did not prevail.
Tax exemptions: referral of proposal to joint survey committee on
1 9 8 3 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of April 4, 1984 .......... Page: 1122
[Motion based on obsolete information:]
634 Representative T. Thompson moved that the rules be suspended and that Assembly Bill 1021 [relating to eliminating capital gains as a preference item for purposes of computing
the minimum tax, replacing the inheritance tax with an estate tax, creating a system for the administration of the estate tax, abolishing the gift tax and providing penalties, relating to the unappropriated reserve in the state general fund, relating to increasing the 1985 distribution for Wisconsin state property tax relief and modifying the relief distribution formulas for school levies and school aids, relating to indexing the standard deduction and the brackets for the individual income tax, relating to the individual and corporate surtaxes] be withdrawn from the committee on Rules and taken up at this time.
The speaker [Loftus] ruled the motion out of order because the bill had been referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions pursuant to Assembly Rule 24 (3) (a).
1 9 8 1 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of February 16, 1982 .......... Page: 2206
Point of order:
Representative Ulichny rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 9 to assembly substitute amendment 2 to Assembly Bill 600 [relating to requiring the use of child restraint systems in motor vehicles, granting rule-making authority and providing a penalty] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54.
[Note:] A.Sub.2 required the use of child safety restraint systems for children under 4 years old. A.Amdt.9 permitted deducting the purchase price of such devices from any state income tax due. While the approach avoided the "tax exemption" question it would, nevertheless, have given the bill a significant fiscal effect.
A.Rule 54 (3) (a) declares not germane "one individual proposition amending another individual proposition".
The chair [Rep. Kirby] ruled the point of order well taken.
1 9 7 9 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of March 4, 1980 .......... Page: 2440
[Background:] Assembly Bill 866, "relating to a 4-year phase-in of a 60% income tax deduction for capital gains and relating to capital gains taxation on home sales by persons leaving Wisconsin", was reached on the calendar. Representative Johnson asked unanimous consent that Assembly Bill 866 be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions. Representative Shabaz objected.
Point of order
Representative Johnson rose to the point of order that Assembly Bill 866 was not properly before the assembly under section 13.52 (6) of the Wisconsin Statutes.
[Note:] Sec. 13.52 (6), stats., requires the referral to the joint survey committee on tax exemptions, at the time of introduction, of any "proposal which affects any existing statute or creates any new statute relating to the exemption of any property or person from any state or local taxes or special assessments".
635 The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order well taken.
[Next item of business called up:] Assembly Bill 1098, "relating to the regulation of occupations and professions by the department of regulation and licensing".
Representative Shabaz moved that Assembly Bill 866 be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions.
Point of order
Representative Kedrowski rose to the point of order that the motion was not in order because Assembly Bill 866 was not before the assembly.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled that the motion required a suspension of the rules because the assembly was on Assembly Bill 1098 and Assembly Bill 866 was not before the assembly.
Point of order
Representative Schneider rose to the point of order that Assembly Bill 866 should have been referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions under section 13.52 (6) of the Wisconsin Statutes.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order well taken.
Point of order
Representative Schneider rose to the point of order that the speaker must refer Assembly Bill 866 to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions at this time.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled that only the assembly had the authority to refer the bill to committee at this time.
[Note:] In adopting its rules for the 1983 session, the assembly created A.Rule 45 (4), which provides: When a proposal, during or after consideration by a standing committee or during consideration by the assembly, is found to be without the report of one or more joint survey committees to which it should have been referred, the proposal shall be so referred by the speaker.
Representative Loftus asked unanimous consent that Assembly Bill 866 be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions. Representative Shabaz objected.
Representative Kirby in the chair.
The question was: Shall the rules be suspended and Assembly Bill 866 be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions? [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-7, noes-90.] Motion failed.
Assembly Journal of March 5, 1980 .......... Page: 2476
[Motion:]
Representative Shabaz moved that Assembly Bill 866 be taken up at this time.
636 [Note:] 1979 AB 866 was trapped in a "catch-22". On 3/4/80, the assembly had refused - 7 to 90 - to refer the proposal to the joint survey committee on tax exemptions.
At the same time, s. 13.52 (6), stats., prevented the assembly from taking further action:
.... "such proposal shall not be considered further by either house until the joint survey committee on tax exemptions has submitted a report, in writing, setting forth an opinion on the legality of the proposal, the fiscal
effect upon the state and its subdivisions and its desirability as a matter of public policy".
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the motion out of order.
Assembly Journal of March 6, 1980 .......... Page: 2507
[Motion:]
Representative Goodrich moved that Assembly Bill 866 be taken up at this time.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the motion out of order.
Assembly Journal of February 26, 1980 .......... Page: 2351
[Motion to re-refer to joint survey committee:]
Representative Johnson moved that the rules be suspended and that Assembly Bill 866 [relating to a 4-year phase-in of a 60% income tax deduction for capital gains and relating to capital gains taxation on home sales by persons leaving Wisconsin] be withdrawn from the Joint Committee on Finance and referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions.
[Note:] Any motion to accelerate the consideration of a proposal beyond the steps provided in the rules amounts to a request for rules suspension and, consequently, requires 2/3 approval.
In adopting its rules for the 1983 session, the assembly created A.Rules 24 (3) (a) and 45 (4) which direct the rules committee to return for appropriate referral, and authorize the speaker to refer, any proposal lacking a required joint survey committee report.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled that it required a suspension of the rules to withdraw Assembly Bill 866 from the Joint Committee on Finance and refer it to a committee other than the committee on Rules.
Representative Shabaz asked unanimous consent that Assembly Bill 866 be withdrawn from the Joint Committee on Finance and referred to the committee on Rules. Granted.
1 9 7 7 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of February 10, 1977 .......... Page: 242
Point of order:
Representative Schneider rose to the point of order that Assembly Bill 61 [relating to exempting from levy limits sewage treatment service charges assessed by a separate taxing unit of government] was required to be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Senate Journal of March 16, 1978 .......... Page: 2002
[Point of order:]
Senator Sensenbrenner raised the point of order that Senate Bill 400 is required to be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of March 27, 1978 .......... Page: 2114
On Thursday, March 16, Senator Sensenbrenner raised the point of order that Senate Bill 400 created a tax exemption and was therefore required to be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions pursuant to s. 13.52 (6) of the statutes. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Section 13.52 (6) provides that "any proposal which .... creates any new statute relating to the exemption of any property or person from any state or local taxes or special assessments .... shall at once be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions ...." Senate Bill 400 provides, in part, that counties may provide law enforcement services to localities within the county and may charge the localities for services provided.
The bill provides that for cities and villages "such expenses shall be certified, returned and paid as are other county charges."
The bill further provides that for unincorporated areas "the county board may levy a tax upon all real and personal property in any unincorporated area .... to reimburse the county for reasonable expenses incurred in providing such services"....
Senator Sensenbrenner contends that because Senate Bill 400 authorizes counties to levy a direct tax on unincorporated areas but does not authorize such a tax on incorporated areas that a tax exemption has thereby been created.
It is the chair's opinion that before there can be an exemption there must first be taxation. Senate Bill 400 does not exempt incorporated areas from a county tax. Rather, it is silent on the matter with the result that incorporated areas are not subject to such a tax in the first place.
Legislation which creates a tax and applies it to a certain class of people or property cannot properly be said to have simultaneously created an exemption for all other people or property not taxed.
Therefore, Senate Bill 400 does not create a tax exemption in the sense contemplated by s. 13.52 (6) and the point of order raised by Sensenbrenner is not well taken.
Prior to raising a point of order Senator Sensenbrenner questioned whether Senate Bill 400 would meet the constitutional requirement that "The rule of taxation shall be uniform ...." It is not within the jurisdiction of the chair to rule on questions of constitutionality. Therefore the chair remains silent on the matter.
