Certainly the federal government should never stoop to virtual blackmail in bullying states to pass laws over which it has no jurisdiction and which the states otherwise would not adopt.

The U.S. Senate wisely avoided that course recently, rejecting an amendment that would have withheld up to 4 percent of federal highway funding from states that do not enact "primary" seat-beat laws.

South Carolina, along with a majority of the other states, currently lacks such a law, which would give police the authority to stop and ticket drivers whose only crime is the failure to wear a seat belt. As of now, law-enforcement officers in this state can give you a ticket for a seat-belt violation only if you are stopped for a separate offense.

Sens. John Warner, R-Va., and Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., in pushing their seat-belt proposal, cited government estimates that more than 20 percent of the people killed in 2002 U.S. vehicle accidents might have survived had they been wearing seat belts.

Sen. George Allen, R-Va., correctly countered: "I think that this cause ought to be dismissed by us here in the Senate, and remanded to the place where this ought to be adjudicated, and that is the state legislatures."

Last year, the General Assembly succumbed to heavy-handed, highway-money pressure from Washington in lowering the legal limit for blood-alcohol content from .10 percent to .08 percent for drunk-driving cases. The risk of losing federal highway money also has been a familiar argument for the proposed seat-belt legislation in our state.

That argument was eliminated by last week's U.S. Senate vote -- at least for now.

Government's increasing tendency to overprotect us from ourselves, however, endures. State lawmakers should beware overzealous efforts to provide government protection from any and all safety hazards.

Wearing seat belts is a prudent safety measure. But making failure to wear a seat belt a primary criminal offense simply goes too far.