Topeka ? A bill imposing new regulations on abortion clinics received a House committee’s endorsement Wednesday after members made sure it applied only to abortion and not all office-based surgeries.

The measure clearing the Health and Human Services Committee is identical to a bill Gov. Kathleen Sebelius vetoed last year, requiring the Department of Health and Environment to impose minimum health and safety standards for abortion clinics.

The committee rewrote legislation championed by Rep. Nancy Kirk, D-Topeka, under which the health department would have drafted regulations for all surgical procedures occurring outside hospitals. Examples include liposuction and some colonoscopies.

Kirk’s measure drew opposition from the Kansas Medical Society, and even Sebelius worried Wednesday about its potential cost. Also, the State Board of Healing Arts, which licenses doctors, approved its own regulations for office-based surgeries last week.

However, for many legislators, the more crucial issue was opposition from Kansans for Life, the state’s largest anti-abortion group, even though Kirk’s proposal would have included abortion clinics. Anti-abortion activists want to single out the state’s five abortion clinics, arguing they need more oversight.

The committee’s 10-8 vote sent the measure to the House for debate, which could occur next week.

“It’s appropriate at this time that we continue looking at clinics we think have serious problems,” said Rep. Brenda Landwehr, R-Wichita, who proposed the amendment rewriting Kirk’s bill.

Kirk predicted Sebelius would veto the bill again. The governor, an abortion rights supporter, also vetoed similar legislation in 2003.

Some members viewed the committee’s action as an attempt to create an issue to energize anti-abortion activists as Sebelius seeks re-election this year. Others worried the bill would create regulations burdensome and expensive enough to shut down clinics.

“What this is all about is denying access to a procedure,” said Rep. Sue Storm, D-Prairie Village.

Abortion opponents have repeatedly pointed to cases involving Drs. George Tiller in Wichita and Krishna Rajanna, who formerly ran a Kansas City, Kan., clinic as examples of why a law regulating clinics is necessary.

A 19-year-old woman died last year after having an abortion at Tiller’s clinic. While an autopsy listed complications from the abortion as the cause of death, the Board of Healing Arts later concluded neither Tiller nor his staff was responsible.

The board revoked Rajanna’s medical license last year over conditions at its clinic, but anti-abortion activists had raised questions two years earlier.

“Most people don’t die of a mole removal or a colonoscopy,” said Rep. Willa DeCastro, R-Wichita, defending the bill’s narrow scope.

But there have been questions about office-based surgeries in other states. For example, in Florida in 2000, regulators banned such surgeries for three months and then imposed new regulations after four deaths in only five months.

In Kansas, an estimated 250 to 300 offices and clinics perform surgeries requiring general anesthesia or sedation.

“Our duties go to everyone, not just to one class of citizens,” said Rep. Pat Colloton, R-Leawood, who supported a broader bill.

But legislators couldn’t be sure how much Kirk’s proposal would increase the health department’s expenses. One estimate was $2 million a year, because the measure called for random inspections of offices.

And the potential cost made Sebelius wary, even though she continues to argue that the state should have standards for all office-based surgeries.

“I don’t think we want to raise the cost of health care and have a layer of additional expense,” she said.