As debate over the budget resolution continues on the Senate floor, Senators are once again discussing the estate tax. Currently the estate tax effects one out of every 200 estates. Once scheduled changes are implemented in 2009, that number will drop to three out of every 1000.

Despite the fact that the 2009 exemption of $7 million per couple would shield 997 out of every 1,000 estates from tax, Senator John Kyl of Arizona has introduced an amendment to further reduce the estate tax by raising the exemption to $10 million per couple and lowering the top rate from 45 percent to 35 percent rate. All of the additional benefits would go to the 3 in 1000 estates that would be taxable under 2009 law. According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, Kyl’s amendment would amount to repeal of more than three-quarters of the estate tax.

So what do all these numbers mean? Because Senator Kyl’s amendment does not provide any offsets to make up the lost revenue, his amendment is likely to add another $300 billion to the deficit over ten years (when interest costs are included). Alternatively, if the lost revenue were made up with spending cuts, then we would see an increased burden on state budgets seeking to maintain programs in the face of sharply reduced federal funding.

Reductions in a tax for so few should not put essential investments for so many at risk. At a time when Americans are asking for increased commitment to health care, education, and veterans’ assistance, among other things, the Senate should think carefully about whose priorities it puts first.

Senators George Voinovich and Sherrod Brown need to hear from their constituents about the need to defeat the Kyl amendment on the estate tax in the interest of protecting essential programs and preventing further strain on already strapped Ohio state budget.