I attended college in California in the 1960s. There was no tuition at the state college I attended. There were some fees each quarter that added up to between $100-300, during the years I was there, but no tuition fee. That was covered by the taxpayers of the State of California. Living expenses and books were the responsibility of the students (or their parents).

Attending one of the campuses of the University of California was more costly, which is why I went to a state college, which became a university during the time I was a student.

I'd like to see a system like that restored today. I'd gladly contribute to that by paying higher state taxes. Gladly. I believe that education helps build society, so I support subsidized higher education.

How that would be funded is the question, really. In my student days, it was funded by the state. Not every state funded their state college and university system as fully as California did at that time. If left to the states, funding will be uneven, so it may require some sort of federal funding.

Mr. Sanders suggests a transaction fee on stock market trades as a source of funds. I think that's a good idea, but it will require a Democratic majority in both houses of Congress to pass legislation to do that. If we can get that, it will be great, regardless of who the President is. If we can't, no such funding will be available.

Individual states could also fund this subsidy. Will they? Not all of them, certainly. Ronald Reagan (damn his eyes) put an end to that in California. It doesn't appear that changing back to subsidizing state colleges and universities is in the cards in California again.

So, a federal program would be a great idea. I hope we can get such a thing, but I'm not optimistic about it.