Arbitrary cut-off amounts is not a sound economic policy, a sliding scale works best for these types of legislation, because somebody whose family is making $131,000 would get no funding, while somebody whose family is making $129,000 would save potentially tens of thousands on tuition. It would encourage tax evasion and disincentivize parents or individuals from taking raises or promotions if it comes at the cost of losing the student's tuition benefits.
A sliding scale subsidy system would mitigate many of these problems, such as those with a family income of over $70,000 receiving 100% of tuition paid for, and slowly adjusting it to $130,000 being cut off from that point.
That's actually a good idea, I should amend the legislation to do that.
If we're getting to the point where we're arguing over a sliding scale that only affects 10% of people, might as well just make it universal.
Or you could just say a family has to pay the same amount of money they're over 130K on. So someone making 135K has to pay 5K, for instance.
