Ruling on the point of order:
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese ruled the point of order raised by Representative Hubler that the Assembly stand adjourned under Assembly Rule 28 (2) well taken.
[Note:] The 8:00 P.M. rule was later repealed.
Point of order under advisement: timeliness of ruling
2 0 0 3 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of February 20, 2003 .......... Page: 75
Assembly Journal of November 13, 2003 .......... Page: 543
Point of order:
Representative Gard rose to the point of order that the motion to withdraw Assembly Bill 622 from the committee on Labor was not in order at this time.
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese took the point of order under advisement.
[Note:] No ruling.
Assembly Rule 15. Withdrawing a proposal from committee.
(1) A proposal may not be withdrawn from any committee until 21 calendar days have expired since the proposal was referred to the committee. After the 21-day period, a proposal may be withdrawn either by motion or by petition, but:
(2) The motion to withdraw a proposal from committee is in order only on the first day in any week on which the call of the roll is taken under the first order of business. The motions shall be decided by vote of a majority of the members present and voting.
Assembly Journal of November 13, 2003 .......... Page: 544
Point of order:
Ruling on the point of order:
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese stated, had a point of order been raised when Assembly Joint Resolution 52 was before the Assembly on Wednesday, November 12, he would have ruled the joint resolution out of order under Assembly Rule 39 (1) because it contained language calling on the Wisconsin congressional delegation. Because no point of order was raised at that time, Speaker Pro Tempore Freese stated that the adoption of the joint resolution was proper.
[Note:] Assembly Rule 39 (1) Except as otherwise provided in joint rule 83 (2) and this subsection, any member or standing committee may introduce or offer proposals in the assembly on any day of the biennial legislative session. No member or standing committee may offer any assembly joint resolution or resolution memorializing Congress or any branch or officer of the federal government.
2 0 0 1 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of October 30, 2001 .......... Page: 484
Point of order:
Representative Carpenter rose to the point of order that Assembly Bill 576 was not properly before the Assembly because the bill was currently under advisement for a previous point of order.
Ruling on the point of order:
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese ruled the point of order not well taken.
[Note:] Assembly Rule 62 (3) (b) 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.
MASON'S MANUAL
Sec. 230. When an Appeal Is in Order
5. While an appeal is pending, a point of order on any other question is not in order but a point of order relating to the appeal may be raised. And if the determination of the appeal is dependent on this point, it may be decided by the presiding officer. This second decision is also subject to appeal. There is an early precedent in Congress that there can be no appeal from a second decision while the other appeal is pending, but that the correctness of the ruling can be brought up when no other business is pending. The presiding officer is subject to censure by the house if the ruling be irregular.
Assembly Journal of November 6, 2001 .......... Page: 520
Point of order:
Representative Travis rose to the point of order that the Chair (Representative Duff) was required, under Assembly Rule 62 (3m), to rule on the point of order raised on June 12, 2001 that Assembly amendment 2 to Senate Bill 110 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54.
Representative Travis withdrew his point of order.
[Note:] The question raised the issue of the meaning of legislative day, in particular, the meaning of "in session."
Assembly Rule 95 (43) Legislative day: Any day on which the legislature is in session.
Assembly Rule 62 (3m) The presiding officer shall rule on a point of order within 7 legislative days after the point of order is raised or on the final legislative day of the last general-business floorperiod preceding the veto review session, whichever is earlier.
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.
Printing and distribution of proposals
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.
Assembly Journal of March 29, 2000 .......... Page: 880
Point of order:
Representative Meyer rose to the point of order that Assembly Bill 942 was not properly before the Assembly under Assembly Rule 35.
The Chair (Representative Duff) took the point of order under advisement.
Representative Meyer withdrew his point of order that Assembly Bill 942 was not properly before the Assembly under Assembly Rule 35.
[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.
Privileged resolution
2 0 0 3 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of February 20, 2003 .......... Page: 75
Assembly Journal of February 20, 2003 .......... Page: 75
Point of order:
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese stated that the question before the Assembly was passage of Assembly Bill 3.
Representative Black rose to the point of order that the pending question before the Assembly was not passage of Assembly Bill 3 because there was a pending privileged resolution which takes precedence.
Representative Gard requested a call of the Assembly. There were sufficient seconds.
Representative Gard asked unanimous consent that the call of the Assembly be lifted. Granted.
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese stated that the question before the Assembly was passage of Assembly Bill 3.
Representative Black rose to the point of order that the pending question before the Assembly was not passage of Assembly Bill 3 under Assembly Rule 65 (1)(i) because there was a pending privileged resolution which takes precedence.
Ruling on the point of order:
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese ruled the point of order out of order because he already ruled that the resolution was not privileged.
[Note:] Assembly Rule 65 (1) When a main question is under debate the following privileged motions and requests are in order if appropriate under the rules governing motions, requests, and proposals:
Assembly Rule 65 (1) (i) To offer and ask consideration of a privileged resolution [rules 33 and 43].
1 9 9 9 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of October 6, 1999 .......... Page: 384
Point of order:
Representative Cullen rose to the point of order that Assembly Joint Resolution 79 was privileged.
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese took the point of order under advisement.
Ruling on the point of order:
The Chair ruled well taken that the point of order raised by Representative Cullen that Assembly Joint Resolution 79 was privileged.
[Note:] The joint resolution provided that the conference report on 1999 AB-133 is amendable but only as to the provision converting lottery appropriations to general program revenue funding.
This may have been a parliamentary inquiry, not a point of order. A parliamentary inquiry might have informed the members whether the joint resolution was privileged. A point of order is appropriate only to obtain a decision by the presiding officer concerning a question currently before the house. Had the joint resolution been ruled not privileged, the point of order could have been made.
Assembly Rule 43 (1) Any resolution or joint resolution relating to the officers, members, former members, procedures, or organization of the assembly or legislature is privileged in that it may be offered under any order of business by a member who has the floor and may be taken up immediately before all other proposals, unless referred by the presiding officer to a standing committee or to the calendar.
1 9 9 5 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of June 16, 1995 .......... Page: 315
Point of order:
Representative Kunicki rose to the point of order that the motion to table Assembly Resolution 25 was not in order under Assembly Rule 33 (3).
Ruling on the point of order:
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese ruled the point of order well taken.
[Note:] Assembly Rule 33 (3) Any resolution offered by the committee on rules to make a proposal a special order is privileged and may be received under any order of business. Such a resolution shall be taken up and acted upon immediately, ahead of all other proposals. The question before the assembly is adoption of the resolution. The only motion in order with regard to any such resolution is the motion to reject. Debate on the questions of adoption and rejection is limited to 5 minutes each.
Proceedings of other house given full faith and credit in this house
1 9 9 5 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of November 14, 1995 .......... Page: 655
Point of order:
Representative Travis rose to the point of order that Assembly Bill 69 was not properly before the Assembly under Assembly Rules 32(1)(a), 35(1), 42(1)(a) & (3), and 52(2)(b).
Ruling on the point of order:
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese ruled the point of order not well taken. Under Assembly Rule 95(60) Senate amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 69 is not considered a proposal, making the point of order raised under Assembly Rule 32(1)(2) not well taken. The Senate adopted Senate amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 69 last week, making the point of order raised under Assembly Rule 35(1) not well taken. Senate amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 69 does not require a second reading reading, making the point of order raised under Assembly Rule 42(1)(a) not well taken. Senate amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 69 is only considered a proposal for the purpose of amending, making the point of order raised under Assembly Rule 52(2)(b) not well taken.
[Note:] Assembly Rule 32 (1) (a) Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, messages from the senate or from the governor may be received and read, and any proposal referenced in the messages that is a senate proposal initially received for consideration of the assembly shall be referred and any other proposals referenced in the messages shall be taken up immediately unless referred by the presiding officer to a standing committee or to the calendar. Any messages from the senate referring to a senate joint resolution memorializing Congress or any branch or officer of the federal government that is received for consideration of the assembly may be read but the senate joint resolution may not be received for consideration. The senate joint resolution shall be transmitted to the senate immediately after the message is read;
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.
Assembly Rule 42 (1) (a) Any proposal that requires 2 or more readings shall be referred by the presiding officer or speaker to committee, or to the calendar for the 2nd legislative day following the referral, or to the committee on rules.
Assembly Rule 42 (3) (a) Beginning on inauguration day and on any day of the regular biennial session period, proposals may be introduced or offered and referred by the speaker or presiding officer if the action is not in conflict with any limitations imposed by the session schedule or otherwise agreed to by both houses.
Assembly Rule 52 (2) (b) Solely for the purpose of amending, senate amendments presented to the assembly for concurrence are treated like proposals; therefore, an amendment to a simple amendment to a senate amendment is in order.
Assembly Rule 95 (60) Proposal: A resolution, joint resolution, or bill put before the assembly for consideration.
