Oh gee... you exceeded the community's expectations by posting an animation. That's quite an accomplishment for you. Now let's see if you can find a single state begging Trump to cut SNAP or limit food choices.
https://www.publichealthlawcenter.org/resources/snap-ban-opt-out-states-map https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/ot...s-changing-rules-on-snap-benefits/ar-AA1AMipH https://www.newsweek.com/map-shows-states-snap-benefits-ban-usda-nebraska-2075470 https://lowincomerelief.com/these-states-are-trying-to-change-what-you-can-buy-with-snap/
So -- at least you took some time to actual go look for information. I will note that most of your links simply indicate states where right-wing MAGA legislators have introduced bills to ban SNAP or limit food. None of these states have passed the laws. Nor have any of the waiver requests coming from the executive branches in red states been approved. But I will give you credit for doing some research. It also gets back to the problem of how do you define "sugary drinks" and "junk food" -- something none of these states has been able to do. Keeping in mind that large food conglomerates in the U.S. will absolutely ensure that any idiot putting forward this type of legislation in a state will be primaried. There will not be much traction on this initiative -- because Trump is unable to define an actionable list of "sugary drinks" and "junk food" either.
They have UPC codes, they're free to try. This is beside the point completely. What perplexes me is that you've gotten to this point. IWO, you realize the snowball rolls downhill and there is tension between individual liberty and central authority... yet you continue to advocate for central authority?!?! The only reason that I can see for this is, you'd like to be the authoritarian. So.... GFY.
I advocate for SNAP because it is one of the most effective government programs in stopping hunger in low income households -- especially among children. Not only does SNAP and associated good programs benefit the recipients, but it also benefits farmers across the U.S. who provide food to the program. Bottom line: The SNAP program is simply good government policy. I strongly support efforts to reign in SNAP / EBT fraud. This potential fraud includes spending benefits on non-food items, selling of EBT cards, people improperly receiving the benefits, and other acts of fraud. I support better (and reasonable) controls being put in place to control this fraud. However the latest MAGA GOP notion to stop SNAP spending on "sugary drinks" and "junk food" is just the latest nonsense from maga-verse where they are tackling a non-important problem that already has a proven solution. The proven solution is to provide SNAP discounts on a defined list of healthy foods -- effectively making it more wise for recipients to spend the SNAP funds on better food rather than junk food. This solution has been tested in trials multiple times and proven to work.
If you advocate for SNAP, you should be happy that more power to implement it is being given to local authorities. But you're too lost in a bunch of convoluted technocrat bullsh*t to realize that's a good thing. You're just dumb bro; no offense.
You really should go look into how SNAP is implemented in terms of federal and state oversight before you make broad statements about "power to implement it is being given to local authorities". First, let's get back to the fact that SNAP is a program defined and funded by Congress. The President should not be attempting to change it via Executive Orders, nor should local authorities be attempting to override the set of rules & regulations that are set in place regarding the administration of the program.