So question with Snap.

Fair on what you're saying with Snap.

I have two questions on Snap.

One, are you for Snap not being given to many of these illegal immigrants and folks who are taking

it at percentages higher where that money needs to be going to Americans for people that needed rather than for

people that are coming to take advantage of the system. Yeah, and honestly, that's the way the system

is structured now, right? Is that this is there, though. Well, well, but then abuse, but abuses is

one thing, right? An abuse, if anyone is breaking the law, then of course you need to be accountable for being able to break the law.

But what we're talking about and the way the system is structured right now is that it's a joint responsibility between the federal government and our states to be able to provide supplemental nutrition for our kids.

And honestly, it's a better thing for all of us because I don't want my kids going

to school hungry. I don't want my kids, you know, suffering from having now suffering from

illnesses that are now going to cost more money for them to have to go to emergency rooms

and deal with. I don't, the more people I can have being productive members of my community,

the less money I have to spend on social services. And so I actually

think this is actually a good investment to be able to do these things. And if the president is going

to adjust it, my point is this, then have a conversation with the nation's governors who are your

partners inside of this work. But you cannot just unilaterally decide that you're going to

adjust it and, again, you're going to adjust it and

again, violate the law to do it and then expect for us to just come up with it. That's not the way

a partnership is supposed to work. Got it. So you are against folks who abuse the system,

but you're for the people that actually need it to take advantage of it.

Absolutely. Okay. I'm, listen, I will debate with anyone who is saying that you need to be able

...