Why does it seem odd that assets as well as income would be factored in to conputation of ability to pay?
If two very similar families start with the same assets, and then have the same income for fifteen years, they should get the same aid.
If there was some external windfall, by all means expect some of that to go to college payments. But if a family simply spent less, why should that increase expected payment?
We're just not used to thinking about it that way because, in terms of taxes, assets always get special treatment because the ultra wealthy hold the majority of their wealth through assets instead of income. And so, we do as they wish.