4. Generally, the states, which have greatly increased their student aid programs, have increased merit scholarships, which tend to benefit the well-to-do. In other words, state policies have generally followed much the same direction as federal. See Heller 2000.

5. Student aid to private higher education was complicated because of the range of private institutions. Most of the CED members had attended elite schools, but most private higher education was not elite. The division is somewhat like that between monopoly and competitive capitalism (O’Connor 1973), in which monopoly sector corporations, like elite institutions of higher education, are able to mobilize state support to build their institutions and capture markets, while competitive sector corporations, like most private institutions of higher education, have to engage in more laissez-fare competition for markets. Even though elite institutions of higher education benefited most, most private institutions were willing to support a market approach because without public subsidy they were in danger of going under. Public institutions, especially the elite, also supported the market approach because it enlarged their student market and tuition revenues (so long as the marginal return for adding students was rising).