Democrats advanced a bill cracking down on the operations of crisis pregnancy centers on Thursday, granting preliminary approval to the first in three bills seeking to bolster abortion rights in Colorado.

If made law, Senate Bill 190 would prohibit crisis pregnancy centers from advertising abortions, emergency contraceptives or referrals they don’t actually provide, classifying it as deceptive advertising. It would also classify providing abortion “reversal” treatment as unprofessional conduct.

SB 190 passed the Senate last week. In a voice vote, House lawmakers advanced the bill to its third and final reading, which could happen Saturday. The bill is expected to pass along party lines, at which point it will be sent to Gov. Jared Polis for final consideration.

Crisis pregnancy centers counsel pregnant women against having an abortion, advocating for parenting or adoption instead. Opponents call them “anti-abortion clinics.”

Bill sponsor Rep. Karen Mccormick, D-longmont, said the centers pretend to offer abortion care but don’t, using “disinformation,

intimidation, shame and delay tactics” to prevent people from accessing abortion care.

“It is harmful and it is wrong,” Mccormick said. “All we’re asking is that they be transparent about the services they provide, and equally transparent about the services they do not provide. ... Don’t trick people.”

In Colorado, there are 51 of these crisis pregnancy centers, compared to 20 abortion clinics.

The American Medical Society Journal of Ethics called the centers unethical, claiming they spread misinformation and give the impression that they offer medical services and advice, “yet they are exempt from regulatory, licensure, and credentialing oversight that apply to health care facilities.” A 2012 study from the National Library of Medicine claimed that 86% of the centers provide misinformation on abortion.

Supporters of crisis pregnancy centers deny misleading patients, arguing that they legitimately provide services, including health education, ultrasounds and counseling. They said SB 190 would unfairly limit the centers’ advertisement, potentially prohibiting them from saying they offer “help with unplanned pregnancies” without specifying the services provided. They also argue that to call them “fake” clinics is a smear campaign perpetuated by abortion providers.

Republicans on Thursday argued that deceptive advertising is rare, only occurring among a small number of crisis pregnancy centers. They alleged that Democrats are targeting the centers for their ideological beliefs, introducing multiple unsuccessful amendments that would have expanded the bill to apply to abortion clinics as well as crisis pregnancy centers.

“We already have consumer protection laws in this state. Why is this legislation necessary?” said Rep. Brandi Bradley, R-littleton. “And if the bill sponsors think that it is, why aren’t abortion centers listed in this legislation?”

Democrats said the state Legislature has passed nearly three dozen bills responding to specific instances of deceptive practices.

Rep. Mike Weissman, D-AUrora, listed time shares, dance studios and contracts for dating services as a few examples, arguing that if the legislature will provide protections against deceptive practices in these “far less consequential” industries, then “we should certainly see fit to set those forth here.”

The bill’s other sponsor Rep. Elisabeth Epps, D-denver, spoke of Colorado’s growing status as a hub for abortion access, saying it is important for residents and visitors alike to be able to clearly identify which clinics do and don’t provide abortion services.

Epps said when she was pregnant at 16 while living in North Carolina, she bought a plane ticket to Colorado with the intention of getting an abortion. She ended up choosing to keep the baby, but around a year later, Epps said she aborted a different pregnancy. During both pregnancies, Epps said she accessed something similar to a crisis pregnancy center.

“What a huge deal it was that I understood my options,” Epps said. “When I needed, far too soon, to make a very different choice, those folks talked me through that, too. ... I want that for other pregnant folks. Unfortunately, that is not uniform in Colorado right now.”

Outside the issue of deceptive advertising, the bulk of Thursday’s debate centered on the portion of the bill that seeks to classify providing abortion “reversal” treatment as unprofessional conduct.

The controversial practice claims that the hormone progesterone can stop a medication-based abortion after a patient has completed the first part of the two-step process.

In the Senate, the bill was amended to require the state medical, nursing and pharmacy boards to evaluate the practice of abortion reversal by Oct. 1. If the boards all agree that it’s a valid medical practice, then it will be considered professional conduct. If not, it will be labeled unprofessional conduct.

While Democrats said this would protect women from being pushed into partaking in a medically-unfounded practice, Republicans argued that it would take away a choice for women who change their minds after starting the process of a medication abortion.

“We should give these women as many choices and options as possible,” said Rep. Rose Pugliese, R-colorado Springs.

“We’re talking about choice but then we’re taking choice away. The freedom to choose life is also a choice.”

Mccormick countered: “Saying the bill takes away a person’s choice makes no sense. We should not allow these unproven therapies to trick people into believing they are getting something that they are absolutely not getting.”

Rep. Gabe Evans, R-fort Lupton, said the lack of broad agreement on the effectiveness of abortion reversal shows that it is not the Legislature’s place to intervene: “Is this actually a good medical policy? Or is this inserting the government between a doctor and their patient?”

Republicans introduced eight amendments Thursday seeking to weaken or change the bill. None of the amendments passed.