House GOP leaders say they need time to heal. But this week will provide no relief, as divisive legislation and the speaker's race supply aftershocks that could widen the fissures in the ranks.

Much of the ruckus is likely to come from a bill that would grant law enforcement officers more authority to enforce the use of seat belts.

The legislation would give officers the power to stop adults for not wearing their seat belts. Current law says drivers can be ticketed for that only if stopped for other violations. The measure has passed the Senate and awaits House action.

In March, opponents successfully shelved the bill after a contentious debate pitted House Speaker David Wilkins against his top lieutenant, Majority Leader Jim Merrill.

Now it's back. Its slightly different form won't head off another fiery collision between the GOP's top guns.

The clash comes at a difficult time for the splintered House RepublicanCaucus, the policy organization comprised of the 74 Republican lawmakers.

It does not vote as a unit on every piece of legislation, but when it holds together, it's a powerful majority that controls the fate of any bill.

Last week, the caucus allowed Republican lawmakers to diverge on a proposal to give tax breaks to parents who bail out of public schools.

That hurt, they said. Nearly 20 GOP members voted against the longstanding Republican tenet of school choice, a key part of Gov. Mark Sanford's legislative agenda. After the vote, more feathers were ruffled when a GOP committee chairman was seen embracing the Democratic leader in celebration.

That was just the latest in a number of divisive issues for the caucus. The race to succeed Wilkins, R-Greenville, has split Republicans at least three ways, with members backing different candidates.

"We're beginning to see in a lot of places (we) are not united," said Rep. Ronnie Townsend, R-Anderson, chairman of the Education and Public Works Committee.

Democrats, more generally known for breaking party ranks, noticed the difference.

"Usually, those guys walk in lock step and are terrified of upsetting the Republican leadership," said Lachlan McIntosh, executive director of the state Democratic Party. "It seems like at least some of them have finally had enough of Sanford's backward ideas and are acting more independently."

The GOP can't expect a cohesive unit on every bill, though, especially not on issues such as school choice and primary seat-belt enforcement, said Bill Moore, a state politics expert at the College of Charleston.

"This is not a parliamentarian system of government, and you can't expect to vote along party lines on all issues," he said.

Merrill, R-Daniel Island, directs the caucus. He concedes that some fences need to be mended but said that won't keep the party from achieving its agenda.

"Time and discussion have a way of making things more palatable," he said. "If something came up and it was a vote toward core principles of the Republican Party, I don't think it would be a problem for everyone to stick together."

Merrill said the speaker's race, which includes Rep. Bobby Harrell, R-Charleston, is the most disruptive factor for the caucus.

"I think the speaker's race has heightened emotions on either side," he said.

That contest isn't going away, and neither will other non-caucus issues such as the seat-belt bill.

On one side of the debate is Merrill, who believes the legislation would intrude on people's privacy.

"My natural inclination is that we already have a law on the books and don't need another vague and subjective law that police can use to stop drivers," he said.

On the other side are Wilkins and Townsend, who as committee chairman propelled the bill back to the House floor last week.

"The speaker asked us to bring it out again," Townsend said. "He has indicated that the business community was anxious to get it back out on the floor."

Wilkins said he supports the bill simply because it "saves lives."

"We've passed it twice before, and I think we ought to make one more good-faith effort," he said.

Two prickly points were changed during recent committee negotiations. Opponents were worried local governments would see the $25 fine as a moneymaking vehicle. Townsend said that problem was eliminated by not allowing add-on court costs.

Concerns about racial profiling were addressed by including a method to track all police stops, he said.

The changes weren't enough to sway Merrill, and probably won't change the mind of Sanford, who has threatened a veto.

But Sanford finds himself in a political squeeze, too. If he were to veto the bill, it would become political fodder for opponents in the 2006 governor's race.

"It will be used against him in the election year," said Will Folks, Sanford's spokesman. "But the merits of the situation is what matters, not the political timing."

For families affected by the tragedy, the political tussle makes no sense.

Lexington resident Carol Kiparisus lost her 26-year-old son two years ago in a car accident. He wasn't wearing his seat belt.

Kiparisus said she believes if stricter laws were on the books, her son would have been more inclined to strap in.

"I'm not much into politics ... but the parents that have lost children want to see tougher laws," she said. "When I see an accident, my heart just starts pounding and I get so upset that nothing's been done."