All Things Considered
October 31, 2003 Friday

Joel Best discusses contemporary myths about poisoned Halloween candy

ROBERT SIEGEL, host:

Here's a question of parental prudence at Halloween: Should this be a night when it's OK to make an exception to the rule against taking candy from strangers? Well, surely some of us are shaking our heads right now, saying no, mindful of the demon neighbor who inserted razor blades in the apples. This, of course, was back in the days of flat razor blades, or perhaps it wasn't. Professor Joel Best, a sociologist at the University of Delaware, has made a study of just such widely rumored, well-known, oft-told cautionary tales of Halloween horrors.

And, Professor Best, the verdict is?

Professor JOEL BEST (University of Delaware): You can have your kids go trick-or-treating. I have studied press coverage going back to 1958, and I can't find any evidence that any child has ever been killed or seriously injured by a contaminated treat picked up in the course of trick-or-treating.

SIEGEL: But, as I'm sure many of our listeners are saying, wasn't there a story about cyanide-laced candy?

Prof. BEST: Yes, indeed. There have been five deaths attributed to poison treats over the years. The most famous of these was a case in Texas where a father did deliberately poison his son's Halloween candy, and he was arrested, convicted and executed for that crime. The other four cases which have been reported in the news have all had follow-up stories which have retracted the claim that the death was the result of a contaminated treat received during trick-or-treating.

SIEGEL: In which case, the question arises: How is it that there is so much lore attached to the poison candy, the booby-trapped fruit--whatever it is--that people are supposed to be aware of on Halloween?

Prof. BEST: Well, I think the best way to think about this is that it's a contemporary legend, and a lot of contemporary legends involve food contaminations, and a lot of them involve stories about threats to children. And this is simply a very popular story which combines those two winning themes.

SIEGEL: So successfully that hospitals in some places have offered to X-ray all Halloween candy so that parents can feel safe about letting their kids eat it.

Prof. BEST: Absolutely. And you also have many, many shopping malls that encourage parents to bring their children to the mall to go trick-or-treating. You know, the fact that institutions buy into this legend doesn't make it any more true.

SIEGEL: There's another story I've heard which was of the child who ingested heroin supposedly inserted into the Halloween candy.

Prof. BEST: Right. That was a case in the 1970s. There was a little boy in Detroit--a widely publicized case, front-page news across the country, that he had been given heroin in his Halloween candy, and it was later discovered that he'd actually gotten into a relative's stash, and people had tried to cover this up by blaming it on Halloween.

SIEGEL: So it sounds like if there's anything for kids to be concerned about at all on Halloween, it's not so much strangers, it's their family, if anyone.

Prof. BEST: Well, it's that, and the other thing I would say is when you read press coverage around Halloween, you realize that it's a genuinely dangerous holiday--that is, there are children who are getting struck by cars, they get tangled up in their costumes and fall down and hurt themselves and so on. It is a night when we send millions of children out into the dark. But I don't think that worrying about poison candy is necessarily a thing that ought to be at the top of the list.

SIEGEL: Well, Joel Best, thank you very much for talking with us once again.

Prof. BEST: Oh, my pleasure.

SIEGEL: Professor Best is chair of sociology and criminal justice at the University of Delaware. He was talking with us about the contemporary legend of tampered Halloween treats.

[Federal Register: October 22, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 204)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 60611-60614]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr22oc03-168]

[[Page 60611]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part VII

The President

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Proclamation 7723--National Forest Products Week, 2003

Proclamation 7724--National Character Counts Week, 2003

Presidential Documents

Title 3--
The President

[[Page 60613]]

Proclamation 7723 of October 17, 2003

National Forest Products Week, 2003

By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation

Our forests are a source of pride for our Nation. They
benefit many Americans who depend on healthy forests
for their livelihoods and quality of life. As we
celebrate National Forest Products Week, we recognize
the importance of our forest resources. We remain
committed to sound, commonsense, forest management.

Beyond their scenic beauty, our forests are vital to
our economy and our way of life. Numerous jobs in the
manufacturing and construction industries, as well as
in the forest products industries, rely on the health
and sustainability of our forests. Forests provide
lumber for building our homes, they provide paper for
publishing our books and newspapers, and forests are
the source of many other wood and paper products that
Americans use every day.

We have a responsibility to maintain the health and
productivity of our forests. In the past, forests have
been spoiled by overgrowth, decimated by insects and
disease, and devastated by wildfires. My
Administration's Healthy Forests Initiative will help
prevent this kind of destruction. Aided by this
Initiative, we treated nearly 2.6 million acres of
forests during the last fiscal year to reduce dangerous
overgrowth and restore forest health. This is more than
double the number of acres that were treated 3 years
ago. My Administration is also committed to fulfilling
the promise of the 1994 Northwest Forest Plan to
protect our most sensitive forest areas, while
supporting a viable forest products industry and jobs
in rural America. By encouraging active forest
management and sustainable timber harvesting, we
strengthen our economy and ensure the lasting beauty of
our woodlands.

Recognizing the importance of our forests in ensuring
the long-term welfare of our Nation, the Congress, by
Public Law 86-753 (36 U.S.C. 123), as amended, has
designated the week beginning on the third Sunday in
October of each year as ``National Forest Products
Week'' and has authorized and requested the President
to issue a proclamation in observance of this week.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the
United States of America, do hereby proclaim October 19
through October 25, 2003, as National Forest Products
Week. I call upon all Americans to observe this week
with appropriate ceremonies and activities.

[[Page 60614]]

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this
seventeenth day of October, in the year of our Lord two
thousand three, and of the Independence of the United
States of America the two hundred and twenty-eighth.

(Presidential Sig.)B

[FR Doc. 03-26830
Filed 10-21-03; 9:20 am]

Billing code 3195-01-P

[Federal Register: October 22, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 204)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 60615-60616]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr22oc03-169]

Presidential Documents

[[Page 60615]]

Proclamation 7724 of October 18, 2003

National Character Counts Week, 2003

By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation

Many of our society's most cherished values, such as
equal treatment for fellow citizens and respect for the
law, depend in practice on individual character. During
National Character Counts Week, we recognize the
importance that good character has played in our
history, celebrate the great character exhibited by our
citizens, and reaffirm our commitment to promoting the
values that will ensure a better future for all.

Throughout history, we see numerous examples of
character in action. Great social reformers like
Harriet Tubman, Frederick Douglass, and Susan B.
Anthony demonstrated courage and resolve when they
stood firm in the face of injustice and acted to right
societal wrongs. Similarly, leaders like Abraham
Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt, were able to guide our
Nation through critical periods because of their strong
personal convictions and sense of moral clarity. Today,
these and other heroes of history inspire us to pursue
virtue and character in our own lives.

Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, we
have seen the great character of our Nation in the
hearts and souls of our citizens and soldiers, and in
countless acts of kindness, generosity, and sacrifice.
To sustain this spirit and continue to improve our
society, we must promote a culture of service,
citizenship, and responsibility in our Nation. Through
the USA Freedom Corps, my Administration is offering
opportunities for citizens to give back to their
communities, helping millions of Americans meet vital
needs as active and engaged citizens in our democratic
society.

The development of character and citizenship has always
been a primary goal of America's schools. Today, it is
more important than ever that we educate our young
people to be knowledgeable, compassionate, and involved
citizens of a free society. Since 2002, 47 State
education agencies and local school districts have
received grants to implement character education
programs. These grants help schools work with students,
parents, and community organizations to effectively
teach universal values such as respect, honesty, and
tolerance.

This week, I urge all Americans to join me in promoting
good character in America. By teaching these values to
our children and living by these values in our own
lives, we can build a future of hope, compassion, and
opportunity for all.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the
United States of America, by virtue of the authority
vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United
States, do hereby proclaim October 19 through October
25, 2003, as National Character Counts Week. I call
upon public officials, educators, librarians, parents,
students, and all the people of the United States to
observe this week with appropriate ceremonies,
activities, and programs.

[[Page 60616]]

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this
eighteenth day of October, in the year of our Lord two
thousand three, and of the Independence of the United
States of America the two hundred and twenty-eighth.

(Presidential Sig.)B

[FR Doc. 03-26831
Filed 10-21-03; 9:20 am]

Billing code 3195-01-P

[Federal Register: October 16, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 200)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 59513-59514]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr16oc03-150]

Presidential Documents

__________________________________________________

Title 3--
The President

[[Page 59513]]

Proclamation 7719 of October 10, 2003

National School Lunch Week, 2003

By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation

Over the last 57 years, the National School Lunch
Program has provided more than 187 billion meals to
young people across our country. During National School
Lunch Week, we recognize the importance that good
nutrition plays in the health of our children and in
the development of good eating habits and healthy
lifestyles.

By helping our children make healthy choices not only
about food but also about their overall well-being, we
can reduce the rates of childhood obesity and diabetes
and help prevent heart disease, stroke, and other
diseases later in life. Nutritious meals can also
improve students' concentration and help them succeed
in school.

As part of the National School Lunch Program, the
Department of Agriculture's Team Nutrition advises
school food service professionals on how to prepare
healthy meals for children. Team Nutrition also
provides nutrition programs for children, families, and
communities to illustrate the link between diet and
health. Today, more than 99,000 schools and childcare
centers are educating young people about good eating
habits. They are also helping to feed our Nation's
needy children through the National School Lunch
Program. For many students, low-cost or free school
meals are sometimes the only nutritious food they eat.
Over the years, the dedication of school officials,
food service professionals, parents, and community
leaders has helped to expand the National School Lunch
Program to include breakfast, after-school snacks, milk
breaks, and summer food programs.

In recognition of the contributions of the National
School Lunch Program to the health, education, and
well-being of America's children, the Congress, by
joint resolution of October 9, 1962 (Public Law 87-
780), as amended, has designated the week beginning on
the second Sunday in October of each year as ``National
School Lunch Week'' and has requested the President to
issue a proclamation in observance of this week.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the
United States of America, do hereby proclaim October 12
through October 18, 2003, as National School Lunch
Week. I call upon all Americans to join the dedicated
individuals who administer the National School Lunch
Program at the State and local levels in appropriate
activities to promote programs that support the health
and well-being of our Nation's children.

[[Page 59514]]

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this
tenth day of October, in the year of our Lord two
thousand three, and of the Independence of the United
States of America the two hundred and twenty-eighth.

(Presidential Sig.)B

[FR Doc. 03-26329
Filed 10-15-03; 8:45 am]

Billing code 3195-01-P

A message from a friend to the FBI terrorism tip address:

On Thursday, October 9, 2003, M.G. "Pat" Robertson, a resident of Virginia Beach, VA, communicated a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) terrorist threat against the U.S. State Department building in Washington, DC. Robertson's business address is 1000 Regent University Drive, Virginia Beach, VA 23464 (phone: 757.226.4127). During a broadcast of Robertson's syndicated television program, the "700 Club," Robertson said the following to National Review journalist Joel Mowbray, "'If I could just get a nuclear device inside Foggy Bottom (the State Department building), I think that's the answer." Robertson then reiterated his threat, "'We've got to blow that thing up."

I live some 4 miles from the State Department building in Arlington, VA and I feel personally threatened by Robertson's remarks. Robertson also has the financial means to acquire WMDs. I would like to know what measures the FBI will take to prevent Robertson from communicating more terrorist threats to the metropolitan Washington, DC region.

If an Islamic cleric in the United States were to say what Robertson said, I am sure he would now either be under arrest or detained incommunicado under the provisions of the Patriot Act.

Separate opinion of MR. JUSTICE BLACK.

I concur in the Court's holding that this record shows no violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. I also agree that Capital Transit's musical programs have not violated the First Amendment. I am of the opinion, however, that subjecting Capital Transit's passengers to the broadcasting of news, public speeches, views, or propaganda of any kind and by any means would violate the First Amendment. To the extent, if any, that the Court holds the contrary, I dissent.

MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER.

The judicial process demands that a judge move within the framework of relevant legal rules and the covenanted modes of thought for ascertaining them. He must think dispassionately and submerge private feeling on every aspect of a case. There is a good deal of shallow talk that the judicial robe does not change the man within it. It does. The fact is that on the whole judges do lay aside private views in discharging their judicial functions. This is achieved through training, professional habits, self-discipline and that fortunate alchemy by which men are loyal to the obligation with which they are entrusted. But it is also true that reason cannot control the subconscious influence of feelings of which it is unaware. When there is ground for believing that such unconscious feelings may operate in the ultimate judgment, or may not unfairly lead others to believe they are operating, judges recuse themselves. They do not sit in judgment. They do this for a variety of reasons. The guiding consideration is that the administration of justice should reasonably appear to be disinterested as well as be so in fact.

This case for me presents such a situation. My feelings are so strongly engaged as a victim of the practice in controversy that I had better not participate in judicial judgment upon it. I am explicit as to the reason for my non-participation in this case because I have for some time been of the view that it is desirable to state why one takes himself out of a case.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, dissenting.

This is a case of first impression. There are no precedents to construe; no principles previously expounded to apply. We write on a clean slate.

The case comes down to the meaning of "liberty" as used in the Fifth Amendment. Liberty in the constitutional sense must mean more than freedom from unlawful governmental restraint; it must include privacy as well, if it is to be a repository of freedom. The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all freedom. Part of our claim to privacy is in the prohibition of the Fourth Amendment against unreasonable searches and seizures. It gives the guarantee that a man's home is his castle beyond invasion either by inquisitive or by officious people. A man loses that privacy of course when he goes upon the streets or enters public places. But even in his activities outside the home he has immunities from controls bearing on privacy. He may not be compelled against his will to attend a religious service; he may not be forced to make an affirmation or observe a ritual that violates his scruples; he may not be made to accept one religious, political, or philosophical creed as against another. Freedom of religion and freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment give more than the privilege to worship, to write, to speak as one chooses; they give freedom not to do nor to act as the government chooses. The First Amendment in its respect for the conscience of the individual honors the sanctity of thought and belief. To think as one chooses, to believe what one wishes are important aspects of the constitutional right to be let alone.

If we remembered this lesson taught by the First Amendment, I do not believe we would construe "liberty" within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment as narrowly as the Court does. The present case involves a form of coercion to make people listen. The listeners are of course in a public place; they are on streetcars traveling to and from home. In one sense it can be said that those who ride the streetcars do so voluntarily. Yet in a practical sense they are forced to ride, since this mode of transportation is today essential for many thousands. Compulsion which comes from circumstances can be as real as compulsion which comes from a command.

The streetcar audience is a captive audience. It is there as a matter of necessity, not of choice. One who is in a public vehicle may not of course complain of the noise of the crowd and the babble of tongues. One who enters any public place sacrifices some of his privacy. My protest is against the invasion of his privacy over and beyond the risks of travel.

The government may use the radio (or television) on public vehicles for many purposes. Today it may use it for a cultural end. Tomorrow it may use it for political purposes. So far as the right of privacy is concerned the purpose makes no difference. The music selected by one bureaucrat may be as offensive to some as it is soothing to others. The news commentator chosen to report on the events of the day may give overtones to the news that please the bureau head but which rile the streetcar captive audience. The political philosophy which one radio speaker exudes may be thought by the official who makes up the streetcar programs to be best for the welfare of the people. But the man who listens to it on his way to work in the morning and on his way home at night may think it marks the destruction of the Republic.

One who tunes in on an offensive program at home can turn it off or tune in another station, as he wishes. One who hears disquieting or unpleasant programs in public places, such as restaurants, can get up and leave. But the man on the streetcar has no choice but to sit and listen, or perhaps to sit and to try not to listen.

When we force people to listen to another's ideas, we give the propagandist a powerful weapon. Today it is a business enterprise working out a radio program under the auspices of government. Tomorrow it may be a dominant political or religious group. Today the purpose is benign; there is no invidious cast to the programs. But the vice is inherent in the system. Once privacy is invaded, privacy is gone. Once a man is forced to submit to one type of radio program, he can be forced to submit to another. It may be but a short step from a cultural program to a political program.

If liberty is to flourish, government should never be allowed to force people to listen to any radio program. The right of privacy should include the right to pick and choose from competing entertainments, competing propaganda, competing political philosophies. If people are let alone in those choices, the right of privacy will pay dividends in character and integrity. The strength of our system is in the dignity, the resourcefulness, and the independence of our people. Our confidence is in their ability as individuals to make the wisest choice. That system cannot flourish if regimentation takes hold. The right of privacy, today violated, is a powerful deterrent to any one who would control men's minds.

[Federal Register: October 8, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 195)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 58257-58258]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr08oc03-134]

Presidential Documents

[[Page 58257]]

Proclamation 7714 of October 3, 2003

Marriage Protection Week, 2003

By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation

Marriage is a sacred institution, and its protection is
essential to the continued strength of our society.
Marriage Protection Week provides an opportunity to
focus our efforts on preserving the sanctity of
marriage and on building strong and healthy marriages
in America.

Marriage is a union between a man and a woman, and my
Administration is working to support the institution of
marriage by helping couples build successful marriages
and be good parents.

To encourage marriage and promote the well-being of
children, I have proposed a healthy marriage initiative
to help couples develop the skills and knowledge to
form and sustain healthy marriages. Research has shown
that, on average, children raised in households headed
by married parents fare better than children who grow
up in other family structures. Through education and
counseling programs, faith-based, community, and
government organizations promote healthy marriages and
a better quality of life for children. By supporting
responsible child-rearing and strong families, my
Administration is seeking to ensure that every child
can grow up in a safe and loving home.

We are also working to make sure that the Federal
Government does not penalize marriage. My tax relief
package eliminated the marriage penalty. And as part of
the welfare reform package I have proposed, we will do
away with the rules that have made it more difficult
for married couples to move out of poverty.

We must support the institution of marriage and help
parents build stronger families. And we must continue
our work to create a compassionate, welcoming society,
where all people are treated with dignity and respect.

During Marriage Protection Week, I call on all
Americans to join me in expressing support for the
institution of marriage with all its benefits to our
people, our culture, and our society.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the
United States of America, by virtue of the authority
vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United
States, do hereby proclaim the week of October 12
through October 18, 2003, as Marriage Protection Week.
I call upon the people of the United States to observe
this week with appropriate programs, activities, and
ceremonies.

[[Page 58258]]

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this
third day of October, in the year of our Lord two
thousand three, and of the Independence of the United
States of America the two hundred and twenty-eighth.

(Presidential Sig.)B

[FR Doc. 03-25652
Filed 10-7-03; 8:45 am]

Billing code 3195-01-P