The Chair ruled the point of order raised by Representative Duff that a motion to table the motion to suspend the rules to immediately message Senate Bill 55 to the Senate was not properly before the Assembly because a motion on the bill had been taken under advisement and that removed the bill from further consideration under Assembly Rule 62 (3)(b)1.
[Note:] Assembly Rule 74 (3) A motion to table may not be applied to procedural motions, except that a motion to withdraw a proposal from committee may be tabled if the motion to withdraw does not involve a suspension of the rules.
Assembly Rule 62 (3) The presiding officer may speak on points of order in preference to others and may:
(a) Immediately announce and explain a ruling on a point of order that has been raised; or
(b) Defer such ruling by taking a point of order under advisement.
1. When the point of order concerns a proposal or a question currently pending on such proposal, taking the point of order under advisement removes the proposal from further consideration until the presiding officer announces the ruling on the point of order.
Assembly Journal of July 2, 2001 .......... Page: 358
Representative Black moved that the rules be suspended and that Senate Bill 55 be immediately messaged to the Senate.
Ruling on the point of order:
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese ruled that the motion was not properly before the Assembly because there was a point of order under advisement and that removed the bill from further consideration under Assembly Rule 62 (3)(b)1.
Representative Black appealed the ruling of the Chair.
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese ruled that an appeal of the Chair was not properly before the Assembly since there was not a ruling on a point of order.
Point of order:
Representative Black rose to the point of order that the motion to suspend the rules and immediately message Senate Bill 55 be to the Senate was in order.
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese took the point of order under advisement.
[Note:] Rep. Black's point of order may have been a parliamentary inquiry.
MASON'S MANUAL
Sec. 230. When an Appeal Is in Order 8. An answer to a parliamentary inquiry is not a decision and therefore cannot be appealed.
Assembly Rule 62 (3) The presiding officer may speak on points of order in preference to others and may:
(a) Immediately announce and explain a ruling on a point of order that has been raised; or
(b) Defer such ruling by taking a point of order under advisement.
1. When the point of order concerns a proposal or a question currently pending on such proposal, taking the point of order under advisement removes the proposal from further consideration until the presiding officer announces the ruling on the point of order.
Assembly Journal of October 30, 2001 .......... Page: 485
Point of order:
Representative Black moved that the rules be suspended and that Assembly Bill 294 be withdrawn from the committee on Labor and Workforce Development and taken up at this time.
Ruling on the point of order:
The Chair (Representative Duff) ruled the motion not timely because Assembly Bill 294 was already under advisement for a previous point of order.
Representative Black appealed the ruling of the Chair.
The Chair (Representative Duff) ruled that a motion to appeal the ruling of the Chair was not in order because his ruling was not made on a point of order raised under Assembly Rule 62.
[Note:] Assembly Rule 62 (6) Any member may appeal a ruling of the presiding officer on any point of order. When an appeal is made, the question is: "Shall the decision of the chair stand as the decision of the assembly?"
Assembly Rule 69. Dilatory motions. (1) When it appears to the presiding officer that any motion or procedure is being used for the purpose of delay, the presiding officer shall declare it dilatory and out of order.
(2) Two consecutive identical motions are dilatory unless significant business has intervened between the motions.
(3) Two consecutive motions to adjourn are not be in order unless other significant business has intervened between the motions or unless no other business is pending before the assembly.
(4) While a motion remains undecided pending the presiding officer's ruling on a point of order taken under advisement, it is dilatory to enter a substantially similar motion on the same question, but it is proper to request an expansion of the question under advisement.
MASON'S MANUAL
Sec. 149. Appeals, Points of Order, Inquiries
See also Ch. 23, Secs. 230-235, Appeals; Ch. 24, Secs. 240-246, Points of Order; and Ch. 25, Secs. 250-254, Parliamentary Inquiries and Other Requests for Information.
1. In conducting its business, a legislative body may have questions relating to policy or procedure presented to it for decision on appeals from decisions on points of order. Appeals may involve important questions of policy and, therefore, appeals may take on all of the characteristics of a main motion and are subject, in general, to the same rules.
2. Points of order are presented to the presiding officer for determination. The decision of the presiding officer on points of order may always be questioned by the body on appeal and the question decided by the body itself.
Assembly Journal of March 14, 2002 .......... Page: 786
Point of order:
Representative Carpenter moved that Assembly Bill 1, January 2002 Special Session be made a Special Order of Business at 10:00 A.M. on Friday, March 15.
Ruling on the point of order:
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese ruled the motion not in order.
[Note:] The assembly had voted on an identical motion after the bill had been given its third reading but this motion was made after the bill had passed.
Assembly Journal of May 15, 2002 .......... Page: 851
Point of order:
Representative Freese rose to the point of order that Assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 1, May 2002 Special Session was not germane to the Governor's Special Session call.
Ruling on the point of order:
Speaker Jensen ruled the point of order not timely because there were still simple amendments pending to Assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 1, May 2002 Special Session. Therefore, even if the substitute amendment was not germane to the special session call at this time, it could still be amended prior to its adoption to make it germane.
[Note:] The question before the assembly at that time was adoption of an amendment, not adoption of the substitute amendment.
Assembly Rule 66 (1) In addition to the motions and requests listed in rule 65 (1) and (2), and subject to the limitations imposed by other rules, the following incidental motions, requests, and questions are in order while a proposal or question is under debate:
(a) A point of order and appeal therefrom [rule 62].
(2) The motions, requests, and questions listed in sub. (1) do not have an order of precedence, can be initiated at any time they are timely, and shall be disposed of before any question to which they relate is returned to or any other incidental motion, request, or question is entertained.
The special session rules provide: Assembly Rule 93 (1) A proposal or amendment may not be considered by the assembly unless it is germane to the session call or pertains to the organization of the legislature.
MASON'S MANUAL
Sec. 241. When Point of Order May Be Raised
See also Sec. 149, Appeals, Points of Order, Inquiries.
5. A point of order must be raised at the time the particular question is pending. It is premature to raise a point of order against an amendment when an amendment of the amendment is pending or when a motion to recommit is pending.
2 0 0 1 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of March 12, 2002 .......... Page: 647
Point of order:
Senator Zien moved that Assembly Bill 675 be withdrawn from the committee Senate Organization.
Senator Chvala raised the point of order that in accordance with Senate Rule 41 the motion to withdraw from the committee on Senate Organization is not proper at this time.
The Chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senator Welch moved that the rules be suspended.
Point of order:
Senator Chvala raised the point of order that the motion is not proper at this time.
The Chair took the point of order under advisement.
[Note:] No ruling.
The first point of order may have been based on one of the following rules:
The motion to withdraw is not listed as one of the permissible motions when a question is under debate:
Senate Rule 63. Motions in order during debate.
(1) When a question is under debate, a motion may not be received except:
Senate Rule 17 (1) (n) Fourteenth order. Motions may be offered.
Senate Rule 41 (1) (a) A proposal or other matter may be rereferred at any time prior to its passage, except that a motion to withdraw from committee may not take effect during the 7 days preceding any scheduled committee hearing or the 7 days following the date on which a committee hearing is held.
The committee on Senate Organization, however, usually does not hold hearings.
The second point of order may have been based on custom that is written into the assembly rules:
Assembly Rule 62 (3) The presiding officer may speak on points of order in preference to others and may:
(a) Immediately announce and explain a ruling on a point of order that has been raised; or
(b) Defer such ruling by taking a point of order under advisement.
1. When the point of order concerns a proposal or a question currently pending on such proposal, taking the point of order under advisement removes the proposal from further consideration until the presiding officer announces the ruling on the point of order.
2. When the point of order concerns an amendment, taking the point of order under advisement removes from further consideration until a ruling on the point of order is made only the specific amendment.
3. When the point of order concerns an amendment to an amendment, taking the point of order under advisement removes from further consideration until a ruling on the point of order is made only the amendment to the amendment, except that the original amendment is also removed from further consideration once all other amendments to the amendment have been disposed of.
4. All points of order involving amendments, or amendments to amendments, must be disposed of before the assembly proceeds to any question of lesser precedence (see rule 65).
1 9 9 9 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of November 9, 1999 .......... Page: 534
Point of order:
Representative Krug rose to the point of order that Assembly Bill 580 was not properly before the Assembly under Assembly Rule 35 (1).
Speaker pro tempore Freese took the point of order under advisement.
Assembly Journal of November 10, 1999 .......... Page: 547
Ruling on the point of order:
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese ruled not well taken the point of order raised by Representative Krug on Tuesday, November 9, that Assembly Bill 580 was not properly before the Assembly under Assembly Rule 35 (1). Speaker Pro Tempore Freese ruled the point of order not well taken because twenty four hours had elapsed.
[Note:] Assembly Rule 35 (1) A proposal, conference committee report, or veto, except a resolution under rule 33 or 43, may not be considered until it has been made available to the members for at least 24 hours excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. If the rules are suspended for the consideration of any proposal before it is available, the proposal shall be read at length at least once before its final passage or final adoption and concurrence.
1 9 9 9 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of January 25, 2000 .......... Page: 393
Point of order:
Senator Chvala raised the point of order that a motion to suspend the rules, withdraw from committee on Agriculture, Environmental Resources and Campaign Finance Reform is an inappropriate motion at this time.
The Chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of February 1, 2000 .......... Page: 413
Ruling of the Chair:
On Tuesday, January 25, 2000, the Senator from the 14th, Senator Welch, moved that the rules be suspended and that Senate Bill 273 be withdrawn from the Committee on Agriculture, Environmental Resources and Campaign Finance Reform and taken up at this time.
The Senator from the 16th raised a point of order that the motion was out of order at this time.
The Chair took the point of order under advisement.
Mason's Manual, Section 282(2) speaks to this circumstance. It reads in part:
"A motion to suspend the rule may be made either under the order of business of motions and resolutions or under the order of business which relates to the matter proposed to be considered under suspension of the rules".
The Senate has established a clear precedent over the past 20 years or more that motions to withdraw a proposal from committee are to be made under the 14th Order of Business, Motions may be offered. One of the most recent written rulings on this was in the 1982 session, when the Senator from the 14th, at that time, Senator Lorge, moved that Senate Bill 493 be withdrawn from committee and taken up immediately. A point of order was raised that the motion was not properly before the Senate. The Chair ruled the point well taken, based on previous rulings the precedent of the Senate was well established that motions to withdraw bills is restricted to the 14th order of business.
It is clear to the Chair, that although the general belief is that a motion to suspend the rules may be made at anytime, that is true only under the order of business which relates to the matter proposed to be considered. Mason's Manual, section 282(1) also states that a motion to suspend the rules may be made at anytime when no question is pending. The motion by the Senator from the 14th, was made while a question relating to Assembly Joint Resolution 48 was pending. Also, the motion related to a Senate Bill. Senate bills are considered under the 11th Order of Business, the Senate was on the 12th Order of Business when the motion was entered.
The precedent of the Senate is very clear, motions related to the withdrawal of proposals from committee are to be made on the 14th Order of Business. The motion offered by the Senator from the 14th was not in compliance with Section 282 of Mason's Manual, now therefore, it is the opinion of the Chair that the point of order raised by the Senator from the 16th, Senator Chvala, is well taken.
[Note:] The motion to withdraw is not listed as one of the permissible motions when a question is under debate:
Senate Rule 63. Motions in order during debate.
(1) When a question is under debate, a motion may not be received except:
Senate Rule 17 (1) (n) Fourteenth order. Motions may be offered.
1 9 9 7 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of March 26, 1998 .......... Page: 560
Point of order:
Senator Wineke, with unanimous consent, asked that Senate Bill 13 be withdrawn from the committee on Economic Development, Housing and Government Operations and taken up at this time.
Ruling on the point of order:
The Chair ruled that this was not a proper motion at this time.
[Note:] The ruling may have been based on one of the following rules:
Senate Rule 17 (1) (n) Fourteenth order. Motions may be offered.
Senate Rule 41 (1) (a) A proposal or other matter may be rereferred at any time prior to its passage, except that a motion to withdraw from committee may not take effect during the 7 days preceding any scheduled committee hearing or the 7 days following the date on which a committee hearing is held.
1 9 9 5 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of February 16, 1995 .......... Page: 100
Point of order:
Representative Black rose to the point of order that Assembly substitute amendment 2 to Assembly Bill 37 was not germane under Assembly Rules 54(1) and 54(3)(f).
The chair (Speaker Pro Tempore Freese) took the point of order under advisement.
Ruling on the point of order:
The chair (Speaker Pro Tempore Freese) ruled not timely the point of order raised by Representative Black that Assembly substitute amendment 2 to Assembly Bill 37 was not germane because there were simple amendments to the substitute amendment pending. The simple amendments to the substitute amendment must be disposed of before a point of order on that substitute amendment would be in order.
Representative Black moved that Assembly substitute amendment 2 to Assembly Bill 37 be laid on the table.
[Note:] Assembly Rule 54 Assembly Rule 54 (1) General statement: The assembly may not consider any assembly amendment or assembly substitute amendment that relates to a different subject or is intended to accomplish a different purpose than that of the proposal to which it relates or that, if adopted and passed, would require a relating clause for the proposal which is substantially different from the proposal's original relating clause or that would totally alter the nature of the proposal.
(3) Assembly amendments that are not germane include:
(f) An amendment that substantially expands the scope of the proposal.
Multi-issue bills: problems of germaneness
2 0 0 1 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of March 14, 2002 .......... Page: 785
Point of order:
Representative Krug rose to the point of order that Assembly amendment 1 to Assembly amendment 4 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 1, January 2002 Special Session was not germane under Assembly Rule 54.
