Constitutional Convention (Monday, March 29, 2004)
«Previous Page · 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 · Next Page»
CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION:
Sen. Lees continued: there are several amendments behind this. If you believe your amendment is better, you have every right to argue that. But from a procedure standpoint, I had the floor in the first convention, and I allowed the speaker to take the floor. I said we have a better solution. I could have asked for the floor and been the first vote. But I believe in the dignity of the process. I had the floor in the first con-con and gave it up. I respect my colleagues, I hope you will vote yes three times.
Rep. Peterson said point of order. The amendment offered by Sens. Berry and Baddour is not properly before us. Because the amendment was offered prior to its time.
Sen. Travaglini said the gentleman is arguing that the clerk should have accepted or proffered other amendments. The point is not well taken. When the current matter was ordered to third, a number of people approached the well and asked their amendments to be considered. None were there first. They were all there at the same time. The clerk properly exercised his authority to accept these amendments in an orderly manner, despite much jockeying. The clerk operated fully within the rules, accepting the amendments filed by Senate counsel. Therefore, this is not a valid point of order.
Rep. Jones said I doubt the ruling of the chair. Rep. Peterson seconded the motion.
A standing vote was ordered, and showed sufficient members arisen. Fifteen minutes debate was ordered. The presence of a quorum was doubted and a roll call was ordered.
A QUORUM CALL SHOWED 188 MEMBERS PRESENT.Question came on letting the ruling of the chair stand. A yes vote indicates support for the ruling; a no vote would overturn it.
Rep. Peterson requested that the vote be taken by a roll call and there was support.
Rep. Peterson said the ruling of the chair stated that we felt that all amendments are properly before us, because they were all filed at the same time. We had asked earlier when amendments would be offered. Well, the other day when we had that debate there was quite a bit of confusion so we went back to the tape and reviewed it. When you review the tape, the amendment in the hands of the clerk was filed before the vote was announced. The vote had been closed but not announced. The statement I submit to you that if we are to follow the earlier rulings, this amendment is not properly before the convention. I respectfully dispute the ruling of the chair.
Rep. Bosley said I hope the decision of the chair stands. We follow the rules of the House in a convention. There are differences in these rules. We do things differently sometimes. When we ascertain a standing vote, we use monitors; we have been using a visual count. The minority leader is quibbling over a procedure. He is actually upset because his amendment is not first. Everyone wants their amendment to go first, but everyone cannot be first. At least in the newspapers, some have complained about the procedures. Any members who know the minority leaders, some staff, can hand amendments to the clerk.
«Previous Page · 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 · Next Page»