Point of order:
Representative Thompson rose to the point of order that Senate Bill 559 [relating to miscellaneous changes in the tax credit, agreements, planning and zoning requirements for farmland preservation enacted by chapter 29, laws of 1977 and making an appropriation] was not properly before the assembly because the bill had been acted on by the senate prior to receipt of a fiscal estimate as required by Joint Rule 49 and Wisconsin Statutes 13.10.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order not timely. [It was also an improper challenge of the proceedings in the other house.]
Assembly Journal of September 7, 1977 .......... Page: 1910
Point of order:
[Assembly Bills 953 to 958 introduced and referred to calendar.]
Representative Olson rose to the point of order that Assembly Bills 953, 954, 955, 956, 957 and 958 were not properly before the assembly because they were introduced as the result of an illegal strike by state employes.
[Note:] The 6 bills had already been referred to calendar. Consequently, they were not "before the assembly" when the point of order was raised.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order not timely.
1 9 7 5 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of March 16, 1976 .......... Page: 3339
Point of order:
Representative Sicula rose to the point of order that he was allowed to raise a point of order on the germaneness of assembly amendment 6 to Senate Bill 255 while the roll call was being taken under Assembly Rule 9 (2) [point of order may be raised at any time except while motion to adjourn is before the assembly].
661 [Note:] The issue was settled in the 1977 adoption of the assembly rules (A.Res. 6) which created the following rule:
"Any interruption of a roll call vote, from the time the voting machine is opened or the calling commenced to the announcement of the official totals by
the presiding officer, shall be out of order except to raise a point of order concerning the taking of the vote."
The chair ruled that interruption of a roll call was not permitted under Assembly Rule 15 (5) (c) and the point of order was not well taken.
Assembly Journal of March 4, 1976 .......... Page: 3126
Point of order:
Representative Thompson rose to the point of order that Assembly Resolution 52 was not in order under Assembly Rule 17m (4).
[Note:] Special orders had to be set for a time at least 24 hours following adoption of the resolution, but were usually considered much later than the stated time.
The speaker [Anderson] ruled the point of order not timely.
Assembly Journal of September 23, 1975 .......... Page: 1973
Point of order:
Representative Shabaz rose to the point of order that the motion for reconsideration [of the vote on bill passage] was not in order because a vote on suspension of the rules to message Assembly Bill 277 constituted intervening business under Assembly Rule 74.
The chair ruled the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of July 10, 1975 .......... Page: 1429
Point of order:
Representative Norquist asked unanimous consent that assembly amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 462 [relating to prohibiting counties, cities, villages, towns and public school districts from imposing residency requirements on certain employes] be revived. Representative Barczak objected.
Representative Norquist moved that assembly amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 462 be revived.
Representative Offner rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 462 was not germane under Assembly Rule 55.
The chair ruled the point of order not timely because the amendment was not before the assembly.
The question was: Shall assembly amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 462 be revived?
The roll was called. [Display of roll call vote omitted.] Motion carried.
Representative Offner rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 462 was not germane under Assembly Rule 55.
The chair ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of June 25, 1975 .......... Page: 1265
Point of order:
662 The question was: Shall Assembly Bill 321 be ordered engrossed and read a third time? Motion carried.
Representative Wahner asked unanimous consent that the rules be suspended and that Assembly Bill 321 be given a third reading. Representative Shabaz objected.
Representative Shabaz moved reconsideration of the vote by which Assembly Bill 321 was ordered to a third reading. Entered.
Representative Wahner moved that the rules be suspended and that the motion for reconsideration of the vote by which Assembly Bill 321 was ordered to a third reading be taken up at this time.
Representative Hanson rose to the point of order that the motion for reconsideration offered by Representative Shabaz was not in order at this time because there had been intervening business.
The chair ruled the point of order not timely.
1 9 7 5 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of March 25, 1976 .......... Page: 2173
[Point of order not timely:]
Senator Bablitch moved that Senate Bill 500 [relating to eligibility for unemployment compensation benefits] be considered for action at this time.
Senator Sensenbrenner raised the point of order that Senate Joint Resolution 15 with 2 assembly amendments was received from the assembly and should be before the senate at this time.
The chair [Lt.Gov. Schreiber] ruled the point of order untimely.
Senate Journal of February 19, 1976 .......... Page: 1779
[Point of order not timely:]
Senator Parys raised the point of order that senate amendment 2 [to Senate Bill 140, relating to collective bargaining units consisting of supervisors] was not germane.
The chair [Lt.Gov. Schreiber] ruled the point of order untimely as the amendment was adopted in September and therefore, not well taken.
1 9 7 3 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of March 14, 1974 .......... Page: 2461
[Timeliness of point of order:]
Senate Bill 280 [relating to requiring death certificates showing cause of deaths from abortion]. Read a second time.
Senate substitute amendment 2 to Senate Bill 280 offered by Senator Risser.
Senator Johnson moved that senate substitute amendment 2 be considered for action at this time. The ayes and noes were required and the vote was: [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-20, noes-11.] Less than two-thirds having voted in the affirmative, the motion did not prevail.
663 Senator Lorge asked unanimous consent that Assembly Bill 837 be withdrawn from the committee on Governmental and Veterans' Affairs and referred to the committee on Industry, Labor, Taxation and Banking. Senator Martin objected.
Senator Devitt raised the point of order that senate substitute amendment 2 to Senate Bill 280 was not germane.
The chair [Lt.Gov. Schreiber] ruled the point of order not timely.
Senate Journal of July 26, 1973 .......... Page: 1483
[Point of order:]
[Senate Bill 185, relating to recodification of the laws pertaining to special education of children with exceptional educational needs, authorizing payment of state aids, granting rule-making authority and increasing an appropriation]
The question was: Concurrence in assembly amendment 12?
Senator J. D. Swan moved nonconcurrence in assembly amendments 12 and 18.
The ayes and noes were demanded and the vote was: [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-3, noes-25.] So the motion did not prevail.
Senator J. D. Swan raised the point of order that Senate Bill 185 required another fiscal note to comply with Wisconsin Stat. 13.10 (2) (2).
The chair [Lt.Gov. Schreiber] ruled the point of order untimely as the question was only one of concurrence in the amendments.
Two-thirds vote required: prevailing side
1 9 8 1 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of June 10, 1982 .......... Page: 2229
Point of order:
Senator Cullen moved a call of the senate. [Display of roll call omitted; present-33, absent-0, with leave-0.]
The question was: Shall the bill [Senate Bill 3, (April 1982) Special Session, relating senate and assembly districts and matters pertaining to the decennial legislative redistricting] pass notwithstanding the objections of the Governor? The ayes and noes were required and the vote was: [Display of roll call not recorded here; shown 6/14/82 on page 2239.]
Prior to the closing of the roll call, the Senator from the 15th Senate District, Senator Cullen, raised the point of order that the Senator from the 31st Senate District, Senator Harnisch, was recorded as having voted while the senate was under call, but was not currently in his chair. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of June 14, 1982 .......... Page: 2239
Ruling of the chair [Pres. Risser]:
664 On Thursday, June 10, the Senator from the 15th, Senator Cullen, raised the point of order that the Senator from the 31st, Senator Harnisch, is recorded as having voted while
the Senate was under call, but was not currently in his seat. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
At the time the point of order was raised the president took note that the Senator from the 31st, Senator Harnisch, was not present. In order for the Senate to transact business under call, all members must be present. All business in reference to the question on which the call was placed should have ceased at the time it was noted that not all members were present. The chair, immediately following the time the point of order was taken under advisement, noticed that the Senator from the 31st returned to the chambers. It is the opinion of the chair that the point of order is well taken. However, since the Senator of the 31st had returned the vote is considered valid.
The ayes and noes were required and the vote was: [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-20, noes-13.] Less than two-thirds having voted in the affirmative, the senate refused to pass the vetoed bill notwithstanding the objections of the Governor.
1 9 7 9 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of April 2, 1980 .......... Page: 1816
[Banking legislation:]
Assembly Bill 495 [relating to authorization to relocate a bank's principal office and to continue to operate the former principal office as a branch under certain circumstances]. Read a third time. The ayes and noes were required and the vote was: [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-18, noes-14.]
Less than two-thirds having voted in the affirmative the bill did not pass.
Senate Journal of April 2, 1980 .......... Page: 1828
[Point of order:]
Senator Lorge moved reconsideration of the vote by which Assembly Bill 495 failed to be concurred in.
