Edwin J. Feulner, President of the Heritage Foundation, wrote an article in which he makes a hasty and overall poor effort to respond to many of the estate tax talking points of the Americans for a Fair Estate Tax coalition. In the article, he argues the estate tax is not necessary to keep the budget balanced because Congress can simply cut spending. Yet spending is actually lower now as a percentage of GDP than it was during the Reagan administration. Further, as the release of Census poverty figures today show, more Americans are in need of a helping hand than ever before. The reality is, when spending is cut, programs like food stamps and Medicaid are cut - mostly because those programs don't have constituencies who can afford powerful and well-paid lobbyists to advocate for them. When spending is cut, hard-working Americans suffer. On the other hand, if the estate tax is repealed, wealthy millionaires and billionaires get to pass on a little bit more money to their heirs, who will already inherit millions tax-free. Mr. Feulner is clear on which group he prefers the government work to help - the poor and dispondent class of millionaires. As with other arguments made by pro-repeal forces, Mr. Feulner's don't add up. This article reflects a continuation of many of the myths pro-repealers have been articulating for years. For a more accurate and honest look at the estate tax, check out Estate's Rites, which appeared last week in the American Prospect. The article shows that the money we would lose with estate tax repeal could be better spent by investing in society, adequately equiping our troops, or providing more retirement security for all Americans rather than padding the pockets even further of the already extremely wealthy.