California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Senate Bill SR94

Introduced
3/20/18  
Refer
3/20/18  
Refer
3/20/18  
Passed
3/22/18  

Caption

Relative to the Standing Rules of the Senate for the 2017–18 Regular Session

Impact

The amendments introduced in SR94 are expected to streamline the legislative process by clearly defining the purview of each standing committee. This clarity can enhance the efficiency with which bills are considered and improve the overall functioning of the Senate. By providing a structured approach to committee assignments, the resolution aims to facilitate better governance and assist in the prioritization of legislative issues, which can ultimately lead to more effective policymaking.

Summary

Senate Resolution No. 94, introduced by Senator Atkins, focuses on amending the Standing Rules of the California Senate for the 2017-18 Regular Session. The resolution specifically proposes changes to Rule 12, which outlines the structure and assignments of various standing committees within the Senate. By detailing the subjects assigned to each committee and the number of members, SR94 aims to clarify the procedural framework of Senate operations, making it more effective and organized in handling legislative matters.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SR94 appears to be generally positive among legislators, as it received strong support, passing with a vote of 37 in favor and none against. This bipartisan support indicates that the resolution is viewed favorably by both parties, highlighting a consensus on the need for clearer rules that can improve the legislative process. The unopposed nature of the voting suggests that there are no significant points of contention among lawmakers regarding these procedural changes.

Contention

While SR94 primarily serves to amend the internal rules of the Senate, the implementation of such amendments can sometimes meet resistance if they lead to shifts in power dynamics within the Senate or if they are perceived to favor certain committees over others. However, based on the voting outcome, no notable points of contention have emerged in this instance, reflecting agreement on the need for a more organized committee structure. The absence of opposition indicates a collective understanding of the benefits provided by the amendments proposed.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

MI HB4870

Campaign finance: contributions and expenditures; funds donated to a candidate for recall efforts; require candidate to establish a separate account used for recall purposes. Amends secs. 3, 11, 12, 21, 24 & 52 of 1976 PA 388 (MCL 169.203 et seq.) & adds sec. 21b.

MI HB4326

Campaign finance: contributions and expenditures; provision related to officeholders raising funds when facing a recall; modify, and require candidate to establish a separate account used for recall purposes. Amends secs. 3, 11, 12, 21, 24 & 52 of 1976 PA 388 (MCL 169.203 et seq.) & adds sec. 21b.

CA SB602

Advisory bodies.

CA SB1048

Advisory bodies.

CA AB3239

Advisory bodies.

KS HR6003

Providing temporary rules of the House of Representatives for the 2023 session until permanent rules are adopted.

MN HC1

A house concurrent resolution relating to the regent nomination joint committee.

AZ HB2443

Campaign finance; contributions limits