Page:United States Reports 546.pdf/357

 546US1

146

Unit: $U13

[08-22-08 15:36:16] PAGES PGT: OPIN

LOCKHART v. UNITED STATES Opinion of the Court

not have intended in 1991 to repeal the Debt Collection Act’s statute of limitations as to offsets against Social Security beneﬁts—since debt collection by Social Security offset was not authorized until ﬁve years later. Therefore, petitioner continues, the Higher Education Technical Amendments’ ab­ rogation of time limits in 1991 only applies to then-valid means of debt collection. We disagree. “The fact that Con­ gress may not have foreseen all of the consequences of a statutory enactment is not a sufﬁcient reason for refusing to give effect to its plain meaning.” Union Bank v. Wolas, 502 U. S. 151, 158 (1991). Petitioner points out that the Higher Education Technical Amendments, unlike the Debt Collection Improvement Act, do not explicitly mention § 407. But § 407(b) only requires an express reference to authorize attachment in the ﬁrst place—which the Debt Collection Improvement Act has al­ ready provided. III Nor does the Debt Collection Improvement Act’s 1996 re­ codiﬁcation of the Debt Collection Act help petitioner. The Debt Collection Improvement Act, in addition to adding off­ set authority against Social Security beneﬁts, retained the Debt Collection Act’s general 10-year bar on offset authority. But the mere retention of this previously enacted time bar does not make the time bar apply in all contexts—a result that would extend far beyond Social Security beneﬁts, since it would imply that the Higher Education Technical Amend­ ments’ abrogation of time limits was now a dead letter as to any kind of administrative offset. Rather, the Higher Edu­ cation Technical Amendments retain their effect as a limited exception to the Debt Collection Act time bar in the student loan context. Finally, we decline to read any meaning into the failed 2004 effort to amend the Debt Collection Act to explicitly authorize offset of debts over 10 years old. See H. R. 5025, 108th Cong., 2d Sess., § 642 (Sept. 8, 2004); S. 2806, 108th