Topeka ? A proposed shield law for journalists failed Wednesday to clear the Senate Judiciary Committee after one member changed her mind and voted against it.

After voting 5-4 against advancing the bill, the committee decided to send it to the Kansas Judicial Council to study the legislation and possibly come up with recommendations for next year. The bill would have given some protection to journalists against having to reveal such information as confidential sources or their notes, unless ordered by a judge.

Supporters of the bill, including Senate Majority Leader Derek Schmidt, thought there were enough votes for it, but they were counting Sen. Jean Schodorf, a Wichita Republican.

But in the end, Schodorf, sister of television journalist Bill Kurtis, voted against the measure. She said later that she changed her mind after listening to the discussion among committee members.

“I said I was supportive of it at first, then I got additional information and thought it needed to be sent to the Judicial Council,” she said. “I’m supportive of the concept, but there were questions of how it would be interpreted.”

Rich Gannon, a Kansas Press Association lobbyist, and Kent Cordish, Kansas Association of Broadcasters executive director, both said Schodorf told them shortly before the meeting that she supported the bill.

Schmidt, an Independence Republican, declined to say whether he had been counting on Schodorf’s vote.

“I thought we had five votes, and it turned out we had four,” he said. “It kills it for this year and doesn’t bode well for its future.”

Schmidt noted that the Judicial Council already has studied the issue and endorsed the concept of a shield law. But it split on how far it should go.

Had the bill cleared the committee, it would have been the first time it would have been up for Senate debate.

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press says 36 states and the District of Columbia have shield laws. A proposed shield law has been introduced in Congress, but that would apply to federal courts.

Under the Kansas proposal, a journalist could be ordered to turn over information if a judge decides after a closed hearing that it’s relevant and can’t be obtained by other means, there’s an “overriding” interest for those seeking the disclosure and it’s necessary “to secure the interests of justice.”

Kansas courts rely on a 1978 state Supreme Court decision that protects reporters only if the information being sought isn’t relevant to an accused criminal’s defense.

One opponent, Sen. John Vratil, said he wasn’t convinced there was a “demonstrated problem” of Kansas journalists being ordered to reveal sources. The Leawood Republican also said he objected to the bill because it would create what he called a “special class of citizens” treated differently from others.

Sen. Terry Bruce questioned whether the bill covers bloggers and also said some of the bill’s language was vague. “What about the Matt Drudges of the world?” the Hutchinson Republican said. “We need something in writing to protect journalists. I just don’t believe their rights should be protected by this particular bill.”