The chair [Pres. Risser] ruled the point of order not well taken.
1 9 8 1 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of April 7, 1982 .......... Page: 3305
Motion:
Representative Thompson asked unanimous consent that the rules be suspended and that Senate Bill 712 [relating to senate and assembly districts] be made a special order of business at 4:00 P.M. today.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the request out of order because Senate Bill 712 was in a conference committee.
1 9 8 1 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of March 23, 1982 .......... Page: 1790
Point of order:
Senator Bablitch raised the point of order that pursuant to Senate Rule 41 the motion to withdraw Assembly Bill 621 [relating to prohibiting 3rd trimester abortions in public hospitals except to save the life of the mother and regulating other abortions in public hospitals, providing aid to women who suffer from certain diseases exacerbated by pregnancy or delivery, providing care for certain diseases of children and making an appropriation] from committee on Human Services and refer to committee on Senate Organization was not properly before us at this time.
Ruling of the chair [Pres. Risser]:
A similar point of order was raised on March 25, 1976 on Assembly Bill 421. On page 2165 of the Journal of the Senate March 25, 1976, the ruling reads: "As it relates to the point of order raised on Assembly Bill 421, the chair ruled that pursuant to Senate Rule 41, a bill could not be withdrawn from committee when a public hearing has already been scheduled. Any attempt to do so would require a suspension of the rules and a two-thirds vote."
On page 540 of the Journal of the Senate March 16, 1971, Senator from the 14th, Senator Lorge, proposed this rule in Senate Resolution 13. The analysis reads: "This proposal would prevent a motion to recall a bill from committee from taking effect prior to hearing if such has been scheduled".
680 Members have raised the question of the definition of a week. The chair has reviewed the rules and has found no definition of a week by our rules; however, the Index to the Senate Rules and Senate Rule 31 (4) states that Webster's New International Dictionary
will be the standard for language usage. Webster's New International Dictionary defines a week as: "any 7 consecutive days."
A hearing is scheduled on the matter for Monday, March 29, 1982. Therefore, based on past precedent and the definition of a week, it is the opinion of the chair that in accordance with Senate Rule 41 (a) the bill cannot be withdrawn at this time and the point of order raised by the Senator of the 24th, Senator Bablitch, is well taken.
[Tabling of appeal:]
Senator Lorge appealed the ruling of the chair. The question was: Shall the decision of the chair stand as the judgment of the senate?
Senator Bablitch moved that the motion to appeal the ruling of the chair be laid on the table. The question was: Shall the motion to appeal the ruling of the chair be laid on the table?
The ayes and noes were demanded and the vote was: [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-18, noes-15.] So the motion prevailed.
Senate Journal of October 30, 1981 .......... Page: 1099
Point of order:
Senator Opitz asked unanimous consent that Assembly Bill 45 [relating to exempting interspousal transfers from inheritance taxes] be withdrawn from the committee on State and Local Affairs and Taxation and referred to committee on Senate Organization.
Senator Bablitch raised the point of order that the motion to withdraw Assembly Bill 45 from committee is subject to motion to table. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of February 2, 1982 .......... Page: 1400
Ruling of the chair [Pres. Risser]:
On Friday, October 30, 1981 Senator Bablitch raised the point of order that a motion to withdraw Assembly Bill 45 from committee is subject to a motion to table.
The chair has reviewed this matter with great care. At first it would appear that a motion to withdraw is not subject to a motion to table. The chair has reviewed the Senate Journals back through the 1969 legislative session. On several occasions, by unanimous consent, and by a majority vote motions to withdraw have been placed on the table. It would appear that the Senate has established this precedent under several presiding officers, although a ruling has never been issued.
Therefore, it is the opinion of the chair that a motion to withdraw is subject to tabling and the point of order raised by the senator from the 24th, Senator Bablitch, is well taken.
By request of Senator Bablitch, with unanimous consent, the motion to withdraw Assembly Bill 45 from committee on State and Local Affairs and Taxation and refer to committee on Senate Organization was laid on the table.
Senate Journal of October 29, 1981 .......... Page: 1076
Point of order:
By request of Senator Bablitch, with unanimous consent, Senate Bill 493 [relating to compulsory motor vehicle insurance, granting rule-making authority and providing a penalty] was referred to joint committee on Finance.
Senator Lorge moved that Senate Bill 493 be withdrawn from joint committee on Finance and considered at this time.
681 Senator Bablitch raised the point of order that the motion was not properly before us. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of January 27, 1982 .......... Page: 1341
Ruling of the chair [Pres. Risser]:
On Thursday, October 29, 1981 Senator Bablitch asked unanimous consent that Senate Bill 493 be referred to the joint committee on Finance and the bill was so referred.
Before the next bill was called Senator Lorge moved that the bill be withdrawn from the joint committee on Finance and considered immediately.
Senator Bablitch raised the point of order that the motion was not properly before the Senate.
A similar point of order was raised by Senator Sensenbrenner on February 14, 1978. The chair's ruling stated in part:
"The chair recalls that in past sessions, operating under similar rules, motions to withdraw from committee have been made at other times than the eighth order. In this case the chair finds no written rule either allowing or forbidding the Senator to make a motion to withdraw from committee at the time he made it. But there is strong precedent this session, enunciated as recently as last week by the majority leader, that motions to withdraw bills from committee will be restricted to the eighth order of business."
A rule change has since moved the order of business "Motions" from the eighth order to the fourteenth order. It is the opinion of the chair that based on this past ruling and our precedent of the past several sessions that the point of order raised by the Senator of the 24th, Senator Bablitch, is well taken, and the motion should be made on the fourteenth order of business.
Senator Lorge appealed the ruling of the chair. By request of Senator Chilsen, with unanimous consent, the motion to appeal the ruling of the chair was laid on the table.
1 9 7 9 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of March 4, 1980 .......... Page: 2423
[Background:] Representative Merkt moved that Assembly Joint Resolution 32 [making an application to the Congress of the United States pursuant to article V of the constitution of the United States, for a convention proposing an amendment to the constitution of the United States to protect the life of all human beings, including unborn children at every stage of their biological development] be withdrawn from the committee on Health and Social Services.
Representative Loftus moved that the motion to withdraw Assembly Joint Resolution 32 from the committee on Health and Social Services be laid on the table.
The question was: Shall the motion to withdraw Assembly Joint Resolution 32 from the committee on Health and Social Services be laid on the table? Motion carried.
[Note:] Upon completion of the 8th order (motions) of business, the first bill on the calendar of Monday, March 3, 1980, was called up: Senate Bill 62, relating to adding 2 dental hygienists to the dentistry examining board.
Returning to the 8th order from the 11th order (3rd reading of senate of proposals) for further consideration of the motion required a rules suspension.
Representative Shabaz moved that the motion to withdraw Assembly Joint Resolution 32 from the committee on Health and Social Services be taken from the table.
682 The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled that the motion required a suspension of the rules and a two-thirds vote.
The question was: Shall the rules be suspended and the motion to withdraw Assembly Joint Resolution 32 from the committee on Health and Social Services be taken from the table? The roll was taken. [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-51, noes-47.] Motion failed [2/3 vote required].
Assembly Journal of March 4, 1980 .......... Page: 2424
Point of order:
Representative Shabaz rose to the point of order that Assembly Joint Resolution 32 was before the assembly because the previous motion did not require a suspension of the rules and a two-thirds vote.
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order not well taken because the assembly was no longer on the eighth order of business.
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 9 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of November 1, 1979 .......... Page: 983
[Motion: right to withdraw]
Senator Harnisch asked unanimous consent that the rules be suspended and Assembly Bill 205 be withdrawn from committee on Education and Revenue and be taken up at this time. Senator Bablitch objected.
Senator Harnisch moved that the rules be suspended and Assembly Bill 205 be withdrawn from committee on Education and Revenue and be taken up at this time.
683 The question was: Shall the rules be suspended and Assembly Bill 205 be withdrawn from committee on Education and Revenue and be taken up at this time? [Intervening text omitted.]
Senator Bablitch asked unanimous consent that the motion to withdraw Assembly Bill 205 from committee on Education and Revenue and take up at this time be withdrawn. Senator Hanaway objected.
Senator Harnisch asked unanimous consent that the motion to withdraw Assembly Bill 205 from committee on Education and Revenue and take up at this time be withdrawn. Senator Murphy objected.
Senator Bablitch moved a call of the senate. [Display of roll call omitted; present-32, absent-1, with leave-0.]
[Point of order:]
Senator Bablitch raised the point of order that a member making a motion could withdraw it without unanimous consent. The chair took the point of order under advisement. [No ruling given?]
1 9 7 7 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of February 14, 1978 .......... Page: 1702
[Background:]
By request of Senator Parys, with unanimous consent, Senate Bill 568 was referred to joint committee on Finance.
Senator Dorman asked unanimous consent that Senate Bill 568 be withdrawn from the joint committee on Finance. Senator Parys objected.
Senator Dorman moved that Senate Bill 568 be withdrawn from the joint committee on Finance.
[Point of order:]
Senator Sensenbrenner raised the point of order that the motion to withdraw Senate Bill 568 from the joint committee on Finance is not in order, and that this motion is only proper under the eighth order of business.
Senator Flynn asked unanimous consent that he be recorded with the majority on the last roll call. The chair took the point of order, raised by Senator Sensenbrenner, under advisement.
Senate Journal of February 14, 1978 .......... Page: 1708
Earlier today Senator Parys asked unanimous consent that Senate Bill 568 be referred to the joint committee on Finance and the bill was so referred.
Before the next bill was called Senator Dorman moved that the bill be withdrawn from the joint committee on Finance which would have the effect of referring the bill to the committee on Senate Organization.
At that time Senator Sensenbrenner raised the point of order that we were not on the eighth order of business and that a motion to withdraw was therefore not proper. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
The chair has checked the rules and finds no written rule that restricts motions to the eighth order of business, although that has been the practice and precedent of this session.
684 The chair recalls that in past sessions, operating under similar rules, motions to withdraw from committee have been made at other times than the eighth order.
It is the chair's opinion however, that unwritten precedent or informal agreements on Senate procedure should control when there is no written rule directly on point.
