Senator Ellis appealed the ruling of the chair. The question was: Shall the decision of the chair stand as the judgment of the senate? The ayes and noes were required and the vote was: [Display of roll call vote omitted; ayes-19, noes-14.] So the decision of the chair shall stand as the judgment of the senate.
1 9 8 5 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of February 20, 1986 .......... Page: 730
Point of order:
Representative Welch rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Senate Bill 285 [relating to revising the statutes governing the pharmacy examining board, granting rule-making authority and providing penalties] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3)(f) [expansion of scope].
[Note:] As part of a general revision of the pharmacy laws, A.Sub.1 contained a provision prohibiting the sale of contraceptives from coin vending machines.
A.Amdt.1 restricted the prohibition to prohibit only contraceptive coin vending machines accessible to minors.
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled the point of order not well taken.
1 9 8 5 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of March 19, 1986 .......... Page: 740
[Point of order:]
Senator Feingold raised the point of order that senate amendment 3 [to Assembly Bill 729, relating to purchase of client care and services by the department of health and social services and county departments that provide social and mental health services and granting rule-making authority] was not germane. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of March 26, 1986 .......... Page: 800
Ruling of the chair:
On Wednesday, March 19, 1986, the senator from the 27th, Senator Feingold, raised the point of order that senate amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 729 was not germane. The Chair took the point of order under advisement.
307 The Chair has examined the amendment and finds that it provides an exemption for certain organizations from including in their contract to provide services a non-discrimination clause relating to sexual orientation. The amendment has the effect of limiting the scope of certain provisions of the proposal.
Therefore, in accordance with Senate Rule 50, it is the opinion of the Chair [Pres. Risser] that the amendment is germane, and the point of order raised by the senator from the 27th is not well taken.
Senate Journal of March 13, 1986 .......... Page: 703
[Point of order:]
Senator Chilsen raised the point of order that senate amendment 1 [to Assembly Bill 350, relating to the form of notification provided to individuals filing statements of economic interests of inspections of their statements] was not germane.
[Note:] The bill broadened the identification requirements for persons (individuals or agents acting on behalf of individuals or corporations) seeking to obtain information from a statement of economic interest filed with the state ethics board. When a statement has been inspected, the law requires the ethics board to notify the filer of that statement.
S.Amdt.1 proposed to repeal the notification requirement, but retained the broadened identification instructions.
The chair [Pres. Risser] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Senate Journal of October 3, 1985 .......... Page: 373
[Point of order:]
Senator Davis raised the point of order that senate amendment 3 [to Senate Bill 217, relating to mobile home parks] was not germane.
[Note:] The bill was limited to prohibiting certain mobile home park lease practices based on the age of the mobile home.
S.Amdt.3 dealt with the related issue of termination of leases.
The chair [Pres. Risser] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Senate Journal of September 24, 1985 .......... Page: 359
[Point of order:]
Senator Adelman raised the point of order that senate amendment 3 [to Senate Joint Resolution 47, relating to memorializing Congress to retain the individual income tax deduction for state and local taxes] was not germane.
308 [Note:] The original joint resolution was solely a memorial to congress, petitioning for the retention of federal income tax deductibility for state and local taxes paid.
S.Amdt.3 petitioned the U.S. congress to consider a specific method of abolishing the income tax deduction (a 5-year phase-out). ( The chair [Pres. Risser] ruled the point of order not well taken.
1 9 8 3 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of October 20, 1983 .......... Page: 481
Point of order:
Representative D. Travis rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 4 to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 260 [relating to official identification cards, changing the legal drinking age, establishing a curfew and creating and changing penalties] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (1).
[Note:] It is generally held that an amendment "limiting the scope of the proposal" is germane [see A.Rule 54 (4) (c)], but it is also true that an amendment is not germane if it "would totally alter the nature of the proposal" [A.Rule 54 (1)]. The scope and nature of a proposal must determine which rule governs in the specific case. Assembly Bill 260 of 1983 was not only a bill to change the legal drinking age, but also a bill dealing with identification card violations and with an early morning driving curfew for persons under 18 years of age.
If the several subjects are so closely related to the drinking age question that the inclusion of other similar subjects or the deletion of any of the existing subjects - other than the nucleus subject of raising the drinking age - will not totally alter the nature of the proposal, then amendments to include [A.Rule 54 (4) (e)] or delete [A.Rule 54 (4) (c)] such subjects will be germane.
On the other hand, if the peripheral subjects are only vaguely related to the core subject of raising the drinking age, then any amendment to delete one of those subjects might "totally alter the nature of the proposal" [A.Rule 54 (1)] and therefore be not germane.
The chair [Speaker Loftus] ruled the point of order not well taken.
1 9 8 3 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of October 11, 1983 .......... Page: 403
[Point of order:]
Senator Strohl raised the point of order that senate amendment 2 [to Assembly Bill 93, relating to requiring public schools to instruct pupils on the relationship between highway safety and the use of drugs] was not germane.
[Note:] A.Amdt.2 proposed to make optional the existing mandatory highway safety instruction.
Although its sponsor may have considered the proposed change from mandatory to optional instruction a narrowing of the proprosal, the effect was to change the nature of both the proposal and the existing statute.
309 The chair [Pres. Risser] ruled the point of order well taken.
1 9 8 1 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of March 31, 1982 .......... Page: 3166
Point of order:
Representative Tuczynski rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 5 to assembly amendment 2 to Senate Bill 700 [relating to authorizing banks to establish branches under certain circumstances and to acquire real estate used for remote paying and receiving facilities] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (e) [negating effect of earlier amendment].
[Note:] A.Amdt.2 made special provision for a 10-block area in Milwaukee between 2nd and 4th street, south of Wright street (2500 north) and north of Brown street (2000 north). AA-4 to AA-2, a floor amendment which was adopted, had changed the southern boundary to Becher street (2100 south, 41 blocks south of Brown street).
AA-5 to AA-2, by proposing to move the southern line from Brown street to Walnut street (1700 north), did not negate the earlier amendment but, rather, reduced the difference.
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach] ruled the point of order not well taken. [Both AA-5 to AA-2, and A.Amdt.2, were subsequently rejected.]
Assembly Journal of March 16, 1982 .......... Page: 2755
Point of order:
Representative Rutkowski rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 241 [relating to note taking by jurors] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54.
[Note:] The bill authorized note taking by jurors. A.Amdt.3 gave the court an option to "not authorize" note taking, but in that case required the court to state its reasons for the record.
Since both the bill and the amendment agreed with the title, it could be argued that the amendment limited the scope of the proposal as permitted by A.Rule 54 (4) (c).
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of March 11, 1982 .......... Page: 2652
Point of order:
310 Representative R. Travis rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to assembly amendment 31 to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 615 [relating to employes' right to know regarding toxic substances and infectious agents, providing a penalty and making an appropriation] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54.
[Note:] A.Amdt.31 created an exception for employers "with less than 10 employes or $1.5 million in gross sales". A.Amdt.1 thereto excluded employers who "transport grain or related agricultural products" from the exception.
Both the amendment, and the amendment to the amendment, dealt with the same exception, and AA-1 to 31 reduced the scope of that exception.
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of March 4, 1982 .......... Page: 2494
Point of order:
Representative Thompson rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 583 [relating to compulsory motor vehicle insurance, granting rule-making authority and providing a penalty] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (1) [change nature] and (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
[Note:] Although the title of A.Sub.1, "relating to impoundment of motor vehicles for failure to deposit security" created that appearance, impoundment had been a part of the bill so that the substitute represented a limitation of scope, which is permitted under A.Rule 54 (4) (c).
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of October 23, 1981 .......... Page: 1467
Point of order:
Representative Norquist rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 2 to Assembly Bill 622 [relating to synchronizing traffic control signals on through highways in municipalities over 25,000 population] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (1).
[Note:] A.Amdt.2, by changing "shall synchronize" to "may synchronize", affected the nature of the bill. But, mandatory or optional, the amended bill would still deal with synchronized traffic signals on through highways. The amendment did not "relate to a different subject", "accomplish a different purpose", or "require a title for the proposal which is substantially different".
The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of October 22, 1981 .......... Page: 1409
Point of order:
Representative Barczak rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 234 [relating to prohibiting counties, cities, villages, towns and public school districts from imposing residency requirements on certain employes] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (1).
[Note:] While 1981 AB 234 prohibited local governments from imposing any residency requirements for employment, A.Amdt.1 would have authorized reasonable travel time limits for emergency personnel.
311 The speaker [Jackamonis] ruled the amendment germane under Assembly Rule 54 (4) (c) [limiting the scope of the proposal] and the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of October 22, 1981 .......... Page: 1413
Point of order:
Representative Dorff rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 4 to Assembly Bill 234 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f) [substantial expansion of scope].
The chair ruled the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of October 22, 1981 .......... Page: 1414
Point of order:
Representative Barczak rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 6 to Assembly Bill 234 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (c) because it was substantially similar to assembly amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 234.
The chair ruled the point of order not well taken.
1 9 8 1 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of February 18, 1982 .......... Page: 1529
Point of order:
Senator Bablitch raised the point of order that senate amendment 6 to senate substitute amendment 1 [to Senate Bill 570, relating to the definition of sexual contact] was not germane. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
[Note:] S.Amdt.6 was a floor amendment to the substitute as affected by the adoption of S.Amdt.5, which had also been a floor amendment.
S.Amdt.5 had inserted a semicolon to split one fact situation (sexually degrading or humiliating) into 2 situations: "sexually degrading; or humiliating". S.Amdt.6 reapplied the modifier "sexually" to the 2nd situation (or sexually humiliating).
Senate Journal of February 18, 1982 .......... Page: 1537
The chair [Pres. Risser] ruled the point of order raised by Senator Bablitch not well taken.
The question was: Adoption of senate amendment 6 to senate substitute amendment 1? Adopted.
