[Note:] Article IV, 7 Organization of legislature; quorum; compulsory attendance. Section 7. Each house shall be the judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own members; and a majority of each shall constitute a quorum to do business, but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and may compel the attendance of absent members in such manner and under such penalties as each house may provide.
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(1) A proposal may not be withdrawn from any committee until 21 calendar days have expired since the proposal was referred to the committee. After the 21-day period, a proposal may be withdrawn either by motion or by petition, but: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 January 27, 2004 .......... Page: 645
Point of order:
Representative Kreuser asked unanimous consent that the rules be suspended and that Senate Bill 214 be withdrawn from today's calendar and taken up at this time.
Representative Foti objected.
Representative Kreuser moved that the rules be suspended and that Senate Bill 214 be withdrawn from today's calendar and taken up at this time.
Representative Gard rose to the point of order that the motion to suspend the rules to withdraw Senate Bill 214 from today's calendar was not in order.
Assembly Journal of January 27, 2004 .......... Page: 646
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese took under advisement the point of order that was raised by Representative Gard that the motion to suspend rules and take up Senate Bill 214 from today's calendar was not in order.
Assembly Journal of February 3, 2004 .......... Page: 663
Representative Foti withdrew the point of order raised on Tuesday, January 27, that a motion to suspend the rules to take up Senate Bill 214 was not in order.
[Note:] The bill, carrying or going armed with a concealed weapon, was vetoed by the governor, and the senate, but not the assembly, overrode the veto.
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 March 13, 2001 .......... Page: 144
Point of order:
Representative Freese rose to the point of order that the motion to withdraw Senate Bill 1 from committee was not in order while a previous point of order on the bill was under advisement.
Speaker Jensen took the point of order under advisement.
Assembly Journal of March 22, 2001 .......... Page: 167
Representative Freese withdrew his point of order raised on Tuesday, March 13, that the motion to withdraw Senate Bill 1 from committee was not in order while a previous point of order was already under advisement.
[Note:] 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 25, 2001 .......... Page: 474
Point of order:
Representative Jensen rose to the point of order that the motion to withdraw Assembly Bill 57 from the joint survey committee on Tax Exemptions was not properly before the Assembly under s. 13.52 of the Wisconsin Statutes.
Representative Duff took the point of order under advisement.
Assembly Journal of October 25, 2001 .......... Page: 474
Ruling on the point of order:
The Chair (Representative Duff) ruled the point of order well taken that a motion to withdraw Assembly Bill 57 from the joint survey committee on Tax Exemptions was not properly before the Assembly under s. 13.52 of the Wisconsin Statutes.
[Note:] 13.52(6) provides "such proposal shall not be considered further by either house until the joint survey committee on tax exemptions has submitted a report, in writing, setting forth an opinion on the legality of the proposal, the fiscal effect upon the state and its subdivisions and its desirability as a matter of public policy and such report has been printed as an appendix to the bill and attached thereto as are amendments". The report had not been prepared.
The motion was also in violation of Assembly Rule 15 (1) (a):
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:
(a) A bill may not be withdrawn from a joint survey committee.
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: 483
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:
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese ruled the motion dilatory under Assembly Rule 69.
Representative Black appealed the ruling of the Chair.
Speaker Pro Tempore Freese 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 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.
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?"
MASON'S MANUAL
Sec. 230. When an Appeal Is in Order
1. The proper method of taking exception to a ruling of a presiding officer is by appeal. All questions of order are decided by the presiding officer, subject to appeal by any member. It is the responsibility of the presiding officer to rule on points of order in a fair and impartial manner.
3. When a presiding officer rules a motion out of order and refuses to present it to the house, the proper procedure is to appeal from the presiding officer's decision. It is not proper for a member to put a question to vote which has been ruled out of order by the presiding officer.
Sec. 240. Purpose of Points of Order.
1. It is the duty of the presiding officer to enforce the rules and orders of the body without delay and without waiting to have the presiding officer's attention called to breaches of order. It is also the right of every member who notices a breach of order or of a rule to insist upon its enforcement. This is called raising a question or point of order, because the member puts to the presiding officer the question as to whether there has been a breach of order or of the rules. It is the duty of the presiding officer to maintain order and enforce the rules.
2. A point of order is the parliamentary device that is used to require a deliberative body to observe its own rules and to follow established parliamentary practice.
3. Any request for compliance with the rules is in effect a point of order and is subject to the same rules.
4. The presiding officer is not required to decide any point of order not directly presented in the proceedings of the body.
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: 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 October 30, 2001 .......... Page: 487
Point of order:
Representative Black rose to the point of order that the motion to suspend the rules and Assembly Bill 294 be withdrawn from the committee on Labor and Workforce Development and taken up at this time was in order.
Ruling on the point of order:
