Absent or not voting – None - 0.
Confirmed.
CAMERON VALCQ, REBECCA
Of Whitefish Bay, as Commissioner of the Public Service Commission, to serve for the term ending March 1, 2025.
The ayes and noes were required and the vote was: ayes, 33; noes, 0; absent or not voting, 0; as follows:
Ayes - Senators Bernier, Bewley, Carpenter, Cowles, Craig, Darling, Erpenbach, Feyen, Fitzgerald, Hansen, Jacque, Johnson, Kapenga, Kooyenga, Larson, LeMahieu, Marklein, Miller, Nass, Olsen, Petrowski, Ringhand, Risser, Roth, Schachtner, Shilling, Smith, Stroebel, L. Taylor, Testin, Tiffany, Wanggaard and Wirch - 33.
Noes – None - 0.
Absent or not voting – None - 0.
Confirmed.
PFAFF, BRAD M.
Of Onalaska, as Secretary of the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, to serve for the term ending at the pleasure of the Governor.
POINT OF ORDER
hist110228Senator Carpenter raised the point of order that the Chair should allow the Senator from the 31st to read a transcribed quote from a committee hearing regarding remarks made by another Senator that was not included in the committee record. _____________
RULING ON POINT OF ORDER
hist109409The Chair ruled that reference to what was spoken by senators at a committee meeting on a matter before the senate was not permitted during floor debate on that matter pursuant to Senate Rule 56. The Chair held that reference to words spoken by senators in committee during floor debate was out of order. Senate Rule 56 provides, in part, that “members who are about to speak in debate or deliver any matter to the senate shall rise in their places and respectfully address the presiding officer, and, upon being recognized, shall proceed, confining themselves to the question under debate and avoiding personalities.” (Emphasis added.) Senate Rule 56 requires that during debate members confine their remarks to the question under debate and to no other matters. This rule does not specifically detail the kinds of matters that may be considered during debate. The rule also requires that members avoid personalities when engaged in debate. This is a general prohibition with little detail. It is a long standing practice of the senate to refer to authoritative sources, such as Mason’s Manual of Legislative Procedure, for guidance in interpreting and applying the senate rules. In fact, a previous Chair, Senator Risser, referred to Mason’s Manual as “the first manual used by the State Senate.” (See Senate Journal, March 6, 1990, pp. 770-772.) Mason’s Manual, Sec. 101.1, provides generally that “debate must be confined to the question before the body.” This is the same language as found in Senate Rule 56. But Mason’s Manual, Sec. 101.5, further interprets this general provision to include the following restriction: “Members may not allude to nor relate in debate what was done or said in committee or by any member of the committee, except such as is contained in the written report made to the house by authority of the committee.” Finally, Mason’s Manual, Sec. 123.1, affirms that, in debate, “no person may indulge in personalities, impugn motives of members, or use indecent or profane language.” Again, similar language is found in Senate Rule 56. According to Mason’s Manual, therefore, senators engaged in floor debate may not reference what other senators said during committee deliberations. The only exception involves remarks senators made at committee that are specifically included in the committee report. This rule requires senators to engage in floor debate on the merits of the question before the body at that time and not on words that may have been spoken during committee deliberations. This is particularly the case if a senator’s motives are being impugned by reference to what the senator may or may not have said during committee deliberations. The Chair finds this guidance from Mason’s Manual persuasive. This rule encourages and promotes direct engagement by senators in floor debate on matters before the body, and not on personalities or on what may have been said by a senator at a different time in a different place.
Therefore, it is the opinion of the Chair that the point of order raised by the Senator from the 3rd is not well taken.
Senator Carpenter appealed the ruling of the Chair.
Senator Fitzgerald moved to call the question.
The question was: Shall the Senate vote immediately on the current question?
The ayes and noes were demanded and the vote was: ayes, 19; noes, 14; absent or not voting, 0; as follows:
Ayes - Senators Bernier, Cowles, Craig, Darling, Feyen, Fitzgerald, Jacque, Kapenga, Kooyenga, LeMahieu, Marklein, Nass, Olsen, Petrowski, Roth, Stroebel, Testin, Tiffany and Wanggaard - 19.
Noes - Senators Bewley, Carpenter, Erpenbach, Hansen, Johnson, Larson, Miller, Ringhand, Risser, Schachtner, Shilling, Smith, L. Taylor and Wirch - 14.
Absent or not voting – None - 0.
Question called.
hist109404The question was: Shall the Decision of the Chair stand as the judgment of the Senate? The ayes and noes were demanded and the vote was: ayes, 19; noes, 14; absent or not voting, 0; as follows:
Ayes - Senators Bernier, Cowles, Craig, Darling, Feyen, Fitzgerald, Jacque, Kapenga, Kooyenga, LeMahieu, Marklein, Nass, Olsen, Petrowski, Roth, Stroebel, Testin, Tiffany and Wanggaard - 19.
Noes - Senators Bewley, Carpenter, Erpenbach, Hansen, Johnson, Larson, Miller, Ringhand, Risser, Schachtner, Shilling, Smith, L. Taylor and Wirch - 14.
Absent or not voting – None - 0.
The Decision of the Chair stands as the judgement of the Senate.
The ayes and noes were required and the vote was: ayes, 14; noes, 19; absent or not voting, 0; as follows:
Ayes - Senators Bewley, Carpenter, Erpenbach, Hansen, Johnson, Larson, Miller, Ringhand, Risser, Schachtner, Shilling, Smith, L. Taylor and Wirch - 14.
Noes - Senators Bernier, Cowles, Craig, Darling, Feyen, Fitzgerald, Jacque, Kapenga, Kooyenga, LeMahieu, Marklein, Nass, Olsen, Petrowski, Roth, Stroebel, Testin, Tiffany and Wanggaard - 19.
Absent or not voting – None - 0.
Refused to confirm.
_____________
Second reading and amendments of senate joint resolutions and senate bills
Senator Fitzgerald asked unanimous consent that Senate Joint Resolution 59 be placed at the foot of the 11th order of business on today's calendar.
Senator Hansen objected.
Senator Fitzgerald moved that Senate Joint Resolution 59 be placed at the foot of the 11th order of business on today’s calendar.
hist109416The question was: Placing Senate Joint Resolution 59 at the foot of the 11th order of business on today’s calendar? The ayes and noes were demanded and the vote was: ayes, 19; noes, 14; absent or not voting, 0; as follows:
Ayes - Senators Bernier, Cowles, Craig, Darling, Feyen, Fitzgerald, Jacque, Kapenga, Kooyenga, LeMahieu, Marklein, Nass, Olsen, Petrowski, Roth, Stroebel, Testin, Tiffany and Wanggaard - 19.
Noes - Senators Bewley, Carpenter, Erpenbach, Hansen, Johnson, Larson, Miller, Ringhand, Risser, Schachtner, Shilling, Smith, L. Taylor and Wirch - 14.
Absent or not voting – None - 0.
Placed at the foot of the 11th order of business.
_____________
Senator Fitzgerald, with unanimous consent, asked that the Senate recess.
3:07 P.M.
_____________
Recess
3:25 P.M.
The Senate reconvened.
Senate President Roth in the chair.
The Chair noted a possible lack of a quorum.
The roll was taken and a quorum was present.
Senate Bill 6
Relating to: committing a fifth or sixth offense related to operating a vehicle while intoxicated and providing a penalty.
hist109418Senator Darling, with unanimous consent, asked that Senate Amendment 1 to Senate Bill 6 be withdrawn and returned to author. hist109419The question was: Adoption of Senate Amendment 2 to Senate Bill 6? Adopted.
hist109421Senator Fitzgerald, with unanimous consent, asked that the rules be suspended and the bill be given its third reading. Read a third time and passed.
Senate Bill 44
Relating to: grants to technical college students for apprenticeship expenses and making an appropriation.
hist109424Senator Jacque moved that Senate Amendment 1 to Senate Substitute Amendment 2 to Senate Bill 44 be laid on the table. The question was: Tabling of Senate Amendment 1 to Senate Substitute Amendment 2 to Senate Bill 44?
The ayes and noes were demanded and the vote was: ayes, 19; noes, 14; absent or not voting, 0; as follows:
Ayes - Senators Bernier, Cowles, Craig, Darling, Feyen, Fitzgerald, Jacque, Kapenga, Kooyenga, LeMahieu, Marklein, Nass, Olsen, Petrowski, Roth, Stroebel, Testin, Tiffany and Wanggaard - 19.
Noes - Senators Bewley, Carpenter, Erpenbach, Hansen, Johnson, Larson, Miller, Ringhand, Risser, Schachtner, Shilling, Smith, L. Taylor and Wirch - 14.
Absent or not voting – None - 0.
Tabled.
hist109425The question was: Adoption of Senate Substitute Amendment 2 to Senate Bill 44? Adopted.
hist109427Senator Fitzgerald, with unanimous consent, asked that the rules be suspended and the bill be given its third reading.
