The New York Times’ editorial board on Wednesday used the paper’s opinion Twitter account to urge readers to contact key senators about the Republican tax bill that has cleared the Senate Budget Committee.
“The NYT Editorial Board is temporarily taking over this acct. to urge the Senate to reject a tax bill that hurts the middle class and the nation’s fiscal health,” the account’s bio read on Wednesday morning.
Up to 13 million people could lose their health insurance and premiums will go up about 10% a year for the next decade. #thetaxbillhurtshttps://t.co/TiTaAAqI7a pic.twitter.com/ZDXm7KV2da
— NYT Opinion (@nytopinion) November 29, 2017
The tax cut bills in the Senate and House would lead to an automatic $25 billion cut in Medicare next year. Many other programs would be cut, too. #thetaxbillhurtshttps://t.co/k6vRHTXoHg
— NYT Opinion (@nytopinion) November 29, 2017
Now is the time to contact senators, if you haven’t done so already, about this tax cut plan. Find yours here: https://t.co/AkqImNKzhT #thetaxbillhurts pic.twitter.com/cNYsE6Rjrl
— NYT Opinion (@nytopinion) November 29, 2017
The editorial board tweeted a link to its criticism of the legislation, with the headline “Senate Considers Making a Terrible Tax Bill Even Worse.”
“Even by the collapsing standards of Congress this is astounding,” the board wrote. “This is really about stuffing the pockets of people like Mr. Trump.”
The board said the legislation would raise the tax and insurance premiums of “millions of poor and middle-class families.”
“The majority leader, Mitch McConnell, is trying to rush the bill to a vote by the end of the week. This self-imposed deadline is intended to give lawmakers and the public as little time as possible to analyze and understand the bill,” the board wrote.
The editorial board said the tax bill was “cooked up behind closed doors by Republicans without Democratic input.”
“Republican senators have a choice. They can follow the will of their donors and vote to take money from the middle class and give it to the wealthiest people in the world,” they wrote. “Or they can vote no, to protect the public and the financial health of the government. There’s no compromise on that.”
