Lawmakers have been praising major universities that have recently outlined plans to reduce tuition for students from low- and middle-income families.

But are these plans mere window dressing to distract Congress from putting new rules on endowment spending?

Mike Burns, a Connecticut strategic-planning consultant, thinks so. Writing on his blog, Nonprofit Board Crisis, he says the incentives will do little to make college more affordable for the masses.

“These offerings look good on paper but what will this really cost the schools — even 1/2 percent annually from the endowments? I think we must applaud the appearance but let’s look closer at the real impact,” Mr. Burns writes. “Have the colleges just found a clever way to stave off regulation and continue to amass wealth — just like their graduates?”

Other critics, meanwhile, say colleges and universities should manage their endowments without government intervention.

Former judge Richard A. Posner, a senior lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, writes on his blog, that unlike charitable foundations, universities have a market incentive to spend their reserves.

“Given the competitive structure of higher education, it is hard to see why government should step in and try to limit tuition. The universities have a competitive incentive to provide financial aid to highly promising applicants who cannot afford full tuition; why those who can afford to pay for it should not be asked to pay for it escapes me,” he writes.

Should colleges be free to manage their endowments and set tuition as they like? Or are these recent moves a positive step for prospective students? Click on the comments link below this post to share your thoughts.