Enactment of this section would ultimately weaken the government's ability to collect these funds and would be difficult to administer. In addition, the absolute prohibition against awarding any Federal permit or license to a delinquent debtor is overly broad and may create serious enforcement burdens. There are many instances where the administration of such a blanket prohibition would not be in the best interest of the government though in specific, targeted circumstances could be a useful tool for some agencies. Similarly, the subcommittee proposes to eliminate the DCIA provision requiring the Department of the Treasury to issue regulations implementing the administrative wage garnishment provisions of the law. Enactment of this provision, I believe, would delay implementation of the administrative wage garnishment provision of the Debt Collection Improvement Act.
Wage garnishment is an action of enormous impact on delinquent debtors.
I believe that if Treasury is absolved from constructing governmentwide regulations for administrative wage garnishment, respective Federal agencies will likely see a need to develop their own regulations in order effectively to protect the government's liability. With the resultant proliferation of separate regulations, the result could be a prolonged period of time before wage garnishment can be applied effectively across the government and may not result in uniform application. Thus, we believe this provision is not necessary. We are also concerned with expanding Federal authorities which impact existing commercial practices. For example, the provision of this legislation that would create a lien on any real property owned by a debtor and thus create clouds on titles throughout the country could significantly and adversely affect the transfer of all real property.