Another year is coming to an end, and the mayor and City Council have, once again, been unable to muster the political will to enact one simple law that will immediately improve the quality of the air we breathe, decrease our health care costs and benefit businesses to boot—all at virtually no cost to the taxpayer. I'm referring, of course, to the workplace smoking ban.

This issue is old enough that the advantages of a ban are well-established and the arguments against it thoroughly debunked. Many locales that have enacted smoking bans have experienced almost immediate declines in the rate of heart disease and other illnesses. In fact, a study published last year suggests the need for a ban is more urgent than any of us ever thought; as little as 30 minutes of exposure to secondhand smoke can trigger a heart attack for the growing number of adults with heart disease.

Apart from the serious health risks, the simple unpleasant consequences of smoke exposure—the itchy eyes, the coughing, the sore throat and the elevated dry-cleaning bills—are reason enough to ban workplace smoking as a public nuisance. As for restaurant and bar owners who say a ban will be bad for business, that is an argument that has been conclusively disproven. Now that numerous cities, states and even other countries have passed such laws, we know that the effect on restaurants and bars is either neutral or positive. The only industry smoking bans hurt is the tobacco industry.

All of us, and especially those who needlessly endanger our health in the place where we earn a living, deserve this law. City residents, a clear majority of whom are nonsmokers, overwhelmingly support it. For those who view this as a "rights" issue, when it comes down to a choice between the right to light up a cigarette and the right to breathe clean air, the answer is obvious. Those who privilege the gripes of restaurant and bar owners forget that government regulation of private businesses is both common and necessary, especially when the goal is to protect the health and safety of employees and patrons. I for one am glad that dishwater temperature can't be lukewarm and that beef can't be served raw. Anyone concerned about Philadelphia's economic growth must understand that if we're going to compete with cities like New York and Boston, we need to offer a working and social environment that is just as healthy. Given declining smoking rates, we should expect that young people in particular will gravitate toward cities where working and going out doesn't mean putting your health at risk.

The real question we need to ask ourselves is not whether a smoking ban is a good thing—it undoubtedly is, regardless of how you frame the issue—but why we don't yet have one. This is a serious concern not just to those who care about this issue, but to anyone who cares about having an effective city government. The members of City Council who oppose the bill have succumbed to the wishes of a minority of frightened but influential business owners who in reality have nothing to lose and probably much to gain. Our mayor is just as culpable. Last spring, he could have, with some strong public statements and a few phone calls, ensured the passage of a bill that was not perfect (show me a piece of legislation that is), but was pretty darn close. Instead, our supposedly health-conscious leader backpedaled and decided that his politics are more important than protecting the health and welfare of the electorate. In all cases, the politicians who have delayed the bill have likely done so because of either their own self-interest or the interests of a few influential campaign contributors, not because they truly don't believe the bill will help the city. We've made some progress in the past year in turning our corrupt political culture around, but unfortunately this is one issue where we are still firmly rooted in the past.

It is time for the mayor and City Council to do their job by passing a bill that is in the best interest of the people of Philadelphia rather than rejecting it to serve the interests of a select few. Do what is right, not what is safe. That is how great leaders—and great cities—are made.

Adam Welsh lives in Bella Vista. If you would like to respond to this Slant or submit one of your own (750 words), e-mail duane@citypaper.net.