When it comes to deciding whether to veto a tougher seat- belt law, Gov. Mark Sanford is being pulled in different directions.

Other state officials, including a top Sanford appointee, say they favor a tougher law.

However, Sanford is being noncommittal while his spokesman expresses reservations about the bill the state Senate passed last week.

Sanford’s libertarian streak has some legislators encouraging the governor to veto the law. But if he does, he would be perhaps the only governor ever to kill a tough seat-belt bill, a spokesman for the Governors Highway Safety Association said last week.

“As far as we know, a governor has not vetoed (one),” said Jonathan Adkins, spokesman for the group, which supports tougher seat-belt laws. “It’s usually one or two members of the legislature who set up the roadblocks.”

A veto also would put Sanford, who was unavailable to comment last week, at odds with other S.C. officials.

A tough law would save 100 S.C. lives a year, prevent more than 1,700 injuries and save $200 million in needless medical bills and other expenses associated with traffic accidents, said Max Young, director of the office of highway safety with the S.C. Department of Public Safety.

Young predicted publicity about a tougher seat-belt law would cause seat-belt usage in the state to rise to 81 percent — the norm in other states with tough seat-belt laws — from its current 65 percent. When belt usage rates rise, death and injury rates drop, Young said.

“It’s a no-brainer,” Tee Hooper, Sanford’s appointed chairman of S.C. Department of Transportation, said of a tougher seat-belt law.

Elizabeth Mabry, director of the Department of Transportation, issued this statement last week: “I’m extremely pleased that the Senate supports the benefits of increasing the use of seat belts.”

‘NOT DIRECTLY HARMING ANOTHER’

South Carolina has one of the nation’s highest traffic fatality rates and one of the lowest rates of seat-belt use. Last year, more than 600 people who died in S.C. traffic accidents weren’t wearing seat belts. Estimates are that about half would be alive today if they had been buckled up.

Current S.C. law prevents police from ticketing unbuckled motorists unless a car is first stopped for another offense.

The bill the Senate passed last week would allow police to ticket unbuckled drivers and passengers without seeing another violation first. The proposed fine and court costs for each violation would total $49.90.

The Senate bill now goes to the House, where Speaker David Wilkins, R-Greenville, predicts its passage later this spring.

That means the crucial unknown is Sanford, whose spokesman Will Folks has derided the Senate bill as “fig leaf” — or insubstantial — legislation.

Folks said Sanford has not made up his mind to veto the Senate bill. “We have to see what ultimately makes it way through the legislative process,” he said.

Personally, the Sanfords and their children wear seat belts and encourage others to wear them as well, Folks said.

Jenny Sanford also is honorary chairwoman of the state’s major advocacy group for a tougher seat-belt law — the S.C. Safe Kids Coalition.

But, Folks added, the governor has problems with the Senate bill that he hopes the House addresses.

Folks said Sanford prefers “market forces” — not “government edict” — be part of any tougher law. For that reason, the governor wants a provision that would allow juries to deny or lessen damages to someone hurt in a crash while not wearing a seat belt. That would make the individual more responsible for his or her own behavior, in line with the governor’s philosophy of liberty and personal responsibility, said Folks.

“We have tried to raise awareness of the impact of choices,” Folks said. “Ultimately, in a free world, the governor believes that people should be able to do things that are both stupid and inherently self-destructive, provided that the harm only comes to them and they are not directly harming another person.”

BETTER THAN NO BILL AT ALL?

Sanford’s point about letting juries consider seat-belt use is a good one, said an official of the Governor’s Highway Safety Association. But the lack of such a provision shouldn’t kill a tougher seat-belt bill, said association executive director Barbara Harsha.

Transportation Department chairman Hooper said he would prefer a seat-belt bill with the provision that Sanford favors. But, he added, the Senate bill is better than no bill at all.

Four other members of the seven-member Department of Transportation’s governing board also said they favored a stronger seat-belt bill, like the one the Senate passed.

“I believe it’s imperative that we find a way to encourage more South Carolinians to wear seat belts,” said Jim Schweitzer, director of the state Department of Public Safety and a member of Sanford’s cabinet. “I think passage by the Senate is certainly a step in the right direction.”

Despite that, when asked if he favored the bill, Schweitzer choose his words carefully. “I have to wait to see what my boss does.”

Meanwhile, as debate swirls, police are prevented in most cases from issuing tickets to South Carolinians who refuse to use seat belts. And unbuckled South Carolinians continue to die and be injured in droves.

In the first 34 days of this year, 64 people killed in car crashes had access to a seat belt. Forty-five — or 70 percent — were not wearing them.