Those pushing for a tougher seat-belt law in South Carolina argue that any measure increasing seat-belt use would save lives. But that argument also could be made for a law mandating that everyone in a moving motor vehicle wear a crash helmet, or a law reducing all speed limits to 40 mph. S.C. House Majority Leader Jim Merrill, R-Daniel Island, is challenging the case for a new seat-belt bill by making that and other pertinent points.

You can already get a ticket for not wearing a seat belt in South Carolina, but only when stopped for another violation. The Senate passed legislation last month to make not wearing a seat belt a primary instead of a secondary offense. Subsequent passage in the House was taken for granted by many. After all, the House had passed tougher seat-belt laws in previous years, only to see them die in the Senate.

But the House could be where a seat-belt law dies this year. After recently moving to bottle up the bill in committee, Rep. Merrill told us last week that he doesn't like anything about the Senate bill. One of his primary objections is what he called "the blackmail" inherent in the call to pass it so the state can meet federal guidelines required for up to $18 million in highway funding. He correctly lamented the General Assembly's "acquiescence" under similar circumstances in 2003 when it lowered the legal blood-alcohol limit from 0.10 to 0.08 percent for driving under the influence.

Rep. Merrill's correct, too, in raising concerns about the "profiling" difficulties that a primary seat-belt law could create with "he said, he said" disputes between officers and motorists. His suspicion that the $25 fine for that primary offense could quickly become a revenue-enhancement tactic also merits serious consideration. So does his insistence that the "worthy goal" of increasing seat-belt use can be attained through education programs and intensified enforcement of that secondary offense.

House Speaker David Wilkins, R-Greenville, a bill supporter, said last week that its delay was a result of a "perfect storm" of circumstances, including the move to the Senate of one of its key supporters. The speaker expects its eventual passage.

Even if that happens, Gov. Mark Sanford's signature is no certainty. He wrote last month on our Commentary Page that he couldn't support the Senate bill because it "would do nothing to make seat belt use admissible as evidence in the courtroom." The governor urges that any new seat-belt bill make records of seat-belt use available to insurance companies to help foster "market-based" incentives for their use. Before this bill comes back for a vote, the House should fully explore the hard questions posed by the governor and Rep. Merrill.