We generally agree with South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford's vetoes as we largely share his minimalist view of government. The more government tries to do for people, the less they're inclined to do for themselves.

Government's primary responsibility is to maintain public order; fund and take care of public facilities, such as schools and roads; and to help needy people who have no other means of help.

Certainly it is well within the realm of the state's responsibility to protect children whenever it can. This is why we must break with Sanford on his veto of the legislature's bill to boost to $150 the fine on drivers for not properly buckling up their children in vehicles. Fortunately, the veto was overridden, and even the governor's good friend Dr. Charles D. Smith, of the Medical University of South Carolina, applauded the override. Dr. Smith has been treating children hurt in auto accidents for 30 years.

The current $25 penalty apparently is not enough to deter many parents from improperly restraining their children, or ignoring the law altogether. And that's why lawmakers acted.

Sanford justified his veto on grounds the bill intruded the government too much into parental responsibility.

We don't buy it. There's nothing wrong with government encouraging its citizens to be more responsible, which is basically what the legislation does. Indeed, it could save many children's lives or prevent their serious injury. Surely the state has an interest in that.

After all, the measure seeks to improve children's lives, as does the state's Department of Social Services. Would the governor want to do away with that agency because it, too, intrudes into parental matters when children are at risk? We think not.

In any event, we commend the legislature for overriding the veto. Sanford allowed his minimalist view of government to carry him overboard.