Washington — Buried in legislation to reauthorize the Higher Education Act that the U.S. House of Representatives is debating today is a provision that would abolish an influential Congressional advisory committee in 2011.

In a report explaining its decision, lawmakers said they appreciated the contributions the Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance had made over the last 20 years but felt that its work had become “duplicative” with services provided by the Congressional Research Service and the Government Accountability Office.

Rachel Racusen, a spokeswoman for Rep. George Miller, a Democrat of California, said it was her boss’s idea to abolish the committee, which counsels Congress and the Education Department on student-aid issues.

“Chairman Miller believes that this committee has outlived its usefulness, and that the taxpayer dollars used to fund this committee could be put to better use: Increasing vigorous oversight of the federal student-aid programs and helping implement the critical protections this bill would provide for students and families,” she wrote in an e-mail message.

That decision was opposed by the chairman of the House’s higher-education subcommittee, who said it was “essential that Congress maintain a mechanism for ongoing independent analysis and advice on the implementation of the student-aid programs.”

“What has made the Advisory Committee an invaluable source of technical expertise and advice … has been its independence — both from the administration and from outside interest groups,” said Ruben Hinojosa, a Democrat of Texas, in a statement in the report.

William J. Goggin, executive director of the committee, said the committee would not fight Mr. Miller’s proposal.

“Congress created us, and Congress has to decide whether to reauthorize us,” he said, adding, “we’ve lasted a lot longer than most advisory committees.”

The committee will meet behind closed doors today and tomorrow to discuss, among other things, the “history and legislative charge” of the committee and to hear an “update on legislative developments.” But Mr. Goggin insisted the retreat was “not going to be a strategy session.”

“The purpose is to bring the three new members up to date on the committee’s work and discuss future directions,” he said.

Mr. Goggin denied a reporter’s request to attend the meeting, and said that it was not required to be open to the public under the Federal Advisory Committee Act. —Kelly Field