Point of order:
Representative Hubler rose to the point of order that the motion to suspend the rules and take up Senate Bill 272 required a two-thirds vote. Although the bill was made a special order of business under Assembly Rule 33, other bills were pending as special orders for an earlier time.
[Note:] No ruling.
Assembly Rule 29 (1) (d) Following the regular orders of business, each calendar shall list all special orders of business that, at the time the calendar is compiled, have been scheduled by the assembly.
Assembly Rule 32 (3) Whenever any proposal has been made a special order of business, the assembly shall proceed to the special order at the designated time.
(a) Special orders have precedence over the regular orders of business and shall be considered in chronological order.
(b) The priority and sequence of special orders are not lost either by adjournment or by recess.
(c)Whenever one special order is under consideration, the arrival of the scheduled time for another special order does not interrupt the discussion of the special order under consideration.
2 0 0 3 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of November 11, 2003 .......... Page: 477
Point of order:
Senator Chvala moved to suspend rules to withdraw from committee on Labor, Small Business Development and Consumer Affairs and take up Senate Bill 240.
Senator Panzer raised the point of order that the motion to withdraw from committee on Labor, Small Business Development and Consumer Affairs Senate Bill 240 was not properly before the Senate.
Ruling on the point of order:
The Chair ruled the point of order well taken.
Senator Erpenbach appealed the ruling of the Chair.
The question was: Shall the Decision of the chair stand as the judgement of the Senate?
The roll was taken. The vote was: Ayes-18, Noes-14. Decision of the Chair stands as the judgement of the Senate.
[Note:] 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 motion to withdraw is not listed as in order during debate:
Senate 63. Motions in order during debate.
(1) When a question is under debate, a motion may not be received except:
Senate Journal of November 11, 2003 .......... Page: 477
Point of order:
Senator Erpenbach moved to make Senate Bill 240 a special order of business at 9:00 A.M. on the calendar of November 13, 2003.
Senator Panzer raised the point of order that the motion to make a special order of business is not proper at this time.
The Chair took the point under advisement.
Senate Journal of January 20, 2004 .......... Page: 550
Ruling on the point of order:
On Tuesday, November 11, 2003, on the 11th order of business, the Senator from the 27th moved that the rules be suspended and Senate Bill 240 be made a special order of business at 10:00 AM on the calendar of November 13, 2003.
The Senator from the 20th raised a point of order that the motion was out of order.
The Chair took the point of order under advisement.
The point is well taken. The Senate has established a clear precedent that motions concerning business that is not currently before the Senate are made under the 14th order of business.
[Note:] 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 motion for a special order is not listed as in order during debate:
Senate 63. Motions in order during debate.
(1) When a question is under debate, a motion may not be received except:
2 0 0 1 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of July 2, 2001 .......... Page: 358
Point of order:
Representative Duff rose to the point of order 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 under Assembly Rule 74 (3).
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese took the point of order under advisement.
Assembly Journal of July 26, 2001 .......... Page: 371
Representative Duff withdrew his point of order raised on Monday, July 2, 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 under Assembly Rule 74 (3).
Assembly Journal of July 2, 2001 .......... Page: 358
Ruling on the point of order:
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 July 2, 2001 .......... Page: 358
Point of order:
Representative Krug moved that all Democratic members of the Assembly be recorded as voting Aye" on the question of shall the rules be suspended and Senate Bill 55 be immediately messaged to the Senate.
Ruling on the point of order:
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese ruled the motion not properly before the Assembly because there was no motion or vote that existed and that Representative Krug's motion was dilatory under Assembly Rule 69 (4).
Representative Krug appealed the ruling of the Chair that the motion was dilatory under Assembly Rule 69 (4).
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese took the appeal under advisement.
[Note:] Assembly Rule 69 (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.
Assembly Journal of October 30, 2001 .......... Page: 483
Point of order:
Representative Staskunas rose to the point of order that the motion to amend the motion that the rules be suspended and that Assembly Bill 294 be withdrawn from the committee on Labor and Workforce Development be amended to substitute Assembly Bill 545 was not in order under Assembly Rule 15.
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese took the point of order under advisement.
Representative Staskunas withdrew the point of order that the motion to amend a motion to suspend the rules and that Assembly Bill 294 be withdrawn from the committee on Labor and Workforce Development was not in order.
[Note:] Assembly Rule 15 (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:
Assembly Rule 65 (2) When a main question is under debate the following subsidiary motions are in order if appropriate under the rules governing motions and proposals:
(g) To amend, if the proposal or motion is amendable [rules 52 to 55 and 70 (2) and (4)].
Assembly Rule 65 (3) The motions and requests listed in subs. (1) and (2) have precedence in the order in which they are listed. While any motion or request is pending, motions or requests of the same or lower precedence are not in order, except that:
(b) Amendments to amendable motions are not in order while a question of higher precedence is pending; and
Under Assembly Rule 66, once an amendment or proposal is offered or introduced in the assembly, it belongs to the assembly. Therefore, it can be returned to the author only by permission of the assembly.
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:
(g) A request or motion by the author of a pending amendment that it be withdrawn and returned to the author.
MASON'S MANUAL
Sec. 64. Amendability of Motions
See also Ch. 38, Secs. 395-421, Motion to Amend.
1. Propositions are sometimes introduced in a form not acceptable to the body. It is essential therefore that it be possible to amend propositions in order that they state the common will of the group. There are limitations, however, on the right to amend, particularly with reference to certain procedural motions. There is a convenient rule by which it is possible to determine whether a proposal is subject to amendment. If it could properly have been submitted in a different form, it can be amended. If the proposition could not have been stated in a different form, it cannot be amended.
Sec. 178. Subsidiary Questions
Definition
1. Subsidiary questions are questions of a procedural nature relating directly to or adhering to main motions.
2. It is not usually possible for main motions to be immediately adopted or rejected upon presentation. In legislative bodies it is usually required that main motions be referred to committee and they may be amended. Debate may be limited to a certain time, or the consideration postponed from time to time. Procedural motions, by which main motions are guided through a legislative body, are a type of motion subsidiary to main motions and from this they acquire their name.
3. Subsidiary motions are most often applied to main motions, but the motion to amend may be applied to any motion which is capable of being stated in more than one form.
Sec. 490. Procedural Motions with Precedence of Main Motions
2. Generally, these motions are subject to the same rules as other simple procedural motions. They are not debatable, except sometimes limited debate is permitted on the motion to withdraw a bill from committee or discharge a committee. They are not subject to the subsidiary motions and can be renewed after a change in the parliamentary situation, but cannot be reconsidered. Unless some special rule has been adopted, they require a majority of the legal votes cast for adoption.
3. Among the more frequently used motions of this class are:
(a) Motions to withdraw from committee or discharge a committee.
Sec. 491. Withdrawing Bills from Committee
2. The motion to withdraw a question or discharge a committee from further consideration is not a suspension of the rules, and may be made without previous notice.
3. The motion, in either form, takes precedence as a main motion. It is not subject to the motions to postpone, to refer to committee, to lay on the table or to amendment.
Assembly Journal of October 30, 2001 .......... Page: 484
Point of order:
Representative Black rose to the point of order that the motion to suspend the rules and that Assembly Bill 294 be withdrawn from the committee on Labor and Workforce Development and taken up at this time was not dilatory.
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese took the point of order under advisement.
Assembly Journal of October 30, 2001 .......... Page: 487
Representative Black withdrew his point of order that the motion to suspend the rules and that Assembly Bill 294 be withdrawn from the committee on Labor and Workforce Development and taken up at this time was not dilatory.
[Note:] This may have been a parliamentary inquiry, not a point of order.
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 Journal of October 30, 2001 .......... Page: 484
Point of order:
Representative Ladwig moved that the rules be suspended and that Assembly Bill 380 be immediately messaged to the Senate.
Representative Black moved that the motion, that the rules be suspended and that Assembly Bill 380 be immediately messaged to the Senate, be amended to substitute Assembly Bill 294 be given a second reading.
Representative Ladwig asked unanimous consent to withdraw her motion that the rules be suspended and that Assembly Bill 380 be immediately messaged to the Senate.
Representative Cullen objected.
Representative Hubler rose to the point of order that amending a motion to substitute a different proposal is not in order under Assembly Rules or Mason's Manual, Chapter 28.
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese took the point of order under advisement.
Assembly Journal of October 30, 2001 .......... Page: 487
Ruling on the point of order:
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese ruled well taken the point of order raised by Representative Hubler that amending a motion to substitute a different proposal is not in order under Assembly Rules or Mason's Manual, Chapter 28.
[Note:] Assembly Rule 68. Amendments to motions to be germane. Amendments to amendable motions are subject to the rules of germaneness in rule 54 as if they were amendments to proposals and amendments.
Assembly Rule 54 (3) Assembly amendments that are not germane include:
(a) One individual proposition amending another individual proposition.
MASON'S MANUAL
Sec. 64. Amendability of Motions. 1. ....There are limitations, however, on the right to amend, particularly with reference to certain procedural motions. There is a convenient rule by which it is possible to determine whether a proposal is subject to amendment. If it could properly have been submitted in a different form, it can be amended. If the proposition could not have been stated in a different form, it cannot be amended.
Sec. 282. Motion to Suspend the Rules
6. A motion to suspend the rules may not be:
(a) Amended.
(b) Debated.
(c) Laid on the table.
(d) Referred to committee.
(e) Postponed.
(f) Reconsidered or renewed for the same purpose on the same day, unless other business has intervened or there has been a change in the parliamentary situation.
A motion to suspend the rules may not have any other subsidiary motion applied to it.
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.
2 0 0 1 S E N A T E
