Saying they did not want to spend millions more on a fight they probably cannot win now, House members Monday approved, 62-12, a bill to adopt an abortion ban, but only if the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision is overturned by another state's legal battle.

"I think this state has been extremely clear on abortion," said Rep. Stephen Urquhart, the St. George Republican behind the so-called "trigger" language that lets other states take the lead on the issue.

Lawmaker after lawmaker said they wanted Utah to stand out as the nation's fiercest abortion foe. But a majority decided in the end to let another state foot the bill this time.

One reason is that Utah's 1991 challenge cost the state more than $1 million. But the state lost.

A bill by sponsoring Rep. Paul Ray, R-Clearfield, would have set aside $439,000 for each of the next three years to help the Utah Attorney General's Office handle the case. And outside lawyers and advocates have promised to help defray costs, he said.

The bill would have restricted abortions to cases of rape, incest or very serious risk to the mother's health, and become the nation's strictest anti-abortion law if signed by the governor.

But estimates for mounting the next Supreme Court assault on the 34-year-old Roe v. Wade have reached as high as $8 million, some lawmakers noted. In addition, there are signs the court is not positioned yet to reverse the landmark case.

Rep. Ron Bigelow, R-West Valley City, said as the state waits for better timing, it can rally ''a groundswell of the people,'' organize with other states and prepare for a ban.

"Let's find a way to win; let's find a way to preserve life," he said. "But it won't happen if we just throw a few dollars at it."

Rep. David Litvak, D-Salt Lake City, said the funding would be better used to address the concerns of children struggling with autism and other disabilities.

"My question is, what about those human lives?" he asked.

But Rep. Mike Noel, R-Kanab, was among those who said Utah ought to "lead this one out" on principle, regardless of cost.

"I'm not worried about the money," he said.

"I'm disappointed we're going to back out of this fight," said Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, R-Orem, echoing Noel.

House members did reject some of the wording, in Urquhart's alternative bill, meant to fund children's programs. They removed provisions that would have directed $2.8 million for children with special needs, for early intervention services and for the Utah Birth Defect Network.

Ray said some of that funding is high on the Legislature's budget priority list.

Said Urquhart: "I thought the purpose of this bill is to preserve the sanctity of life for children, the born and the unborn."

fahys@sltrib.com