But it's a step by House lawmakers to investigate a USA Today report that telephone companies turned over millions of call records without a court warrant to the National Security Agency to help track terrorist plots.

The Bush administration has not confirmed the report, which if true would indicate that a controversial program that monitors international phone calls without a warrant is much broader than previously known.

The measure, introduced by Florida Democratic Rep. Robert Wexler, would direct President Bush and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to turn over all documents related to the program. The committee rejected another proposal that would have asked for information about an aborted internal Justice Department investigation of the program.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is also pressing for more details of the program and is trying to get Gonzales to testify about it at a hearing.

Separate from congressional action, some 20 class-action lawsuits have been filed against Verizon Communications, AT&T and BellSouth about the call records. Five other lawsuits are pending against the Justice Department related to the surveillance program.

On Monday, the Justice Department asked a court to consolidate all of the lawsuits into a single proceeding in the Washington, D.C., federal court.

For another, the U.N. conference will look only at illegal arms and "does not in any way address legal possession," a matter left to national governments to regulate rather than the United Nations, he added.

The campaign is largely the work of the U.S. National Rifle Association, whose executive vice president, Wayne LaPierre, warns on an NRA Web site (http://www.stopungunban.org/) of a July 4 plot "to finalize a U.N. treaty that would strip all citizens of all nations of their right to self-protection."

Kariyawasam said, "The U.N. conference will not negotiate any treaty to prohibit citizens of any country from possessing firearms or to interfere with the legal trade in small arms and light weapons."

U.N. CONSPIRACY -- OR STRONGER CONTROLS?

LaPierre, who also uses the site to pitch his new book, "The Global War on Your Guns," asks NRA members to send letters to Kariyawasam and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan warning that "the American people will never let you take away the rights that our 4th of July holiday represents."

The group also asks members to write to John Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, urging him to "ensure the defeat of this treaty." Bolton's office confirmed he had received tens of thousands of cards from concerned Americans.

"We understand their concerns and will work during the conference to communicate their concerns," Bolton spokesman Richard Grenell said.

At the same time, 1 million people around the world -- symbolizing the number of people killed by guns since the last U.N. small arms conference in 2001 -- have signed a petition backing stronger controls on arms deals in a campaign organized by Oxfam International, Amnesty International and the International Action Network on Small Arms.

The June 26-July 7 U.N. conference was called to review a 2001 U.N. action plan aimed at stemming the illegal global trade in small arms, which, as defined by the United Nations, range from pistols and grenades to mortars and shoulder-fired anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles.

The action program set out broad guidelines for national and global measures to track arms sales, promote better management of government arms stockpiles and encourage the destruction of illicit arms.

The Senate vote marked the ninth time since 1997 that Democrats there have proposed - and Republicans have blocked - a stand-alone increase in the minimum wage. The debate fell along predictable lines.

"Americans believe that no one who works hard for a living should have to live in poverty. A job should lift you out of poverty, not keep you in it," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass. He said a worker paid $5.15 an hour would earn $10,700 a year, "almost $6,000 below the poverty line for a family of three."

Kennedy also said lawmakers' annual pay has risen by roughly $30,000 since the last increase in the minimum wage.

Republicans said a minimum wage increase would wind up hurting the low-wage workers that Democrats said they want to help.

"For every increase you make in the minimum wage, you will cost some of them their jobs," said Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga.

He described the clash as a "classic debate between two very different philosophies. One philosophy that believes in the marketplace, the competitive system ... and entrepreneurship. And secondly is the argument that says the government knows better and that topdown mandates work."

The measure drew the support of 43 Democrats, eight Republicans and one independent. Four of those eight Republicans are seeking re-election in the fall.

Democrats had conceded in advance that this attempt to raise the minimum wage would fare no better than their previous attempts. At the same time, they have made clear in recent days they hope to gain support in the coming midterm elections by stressing the issue. Organized labor supports the legislation, and Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., said that contrary to some impressions, most minimum wage workers are adults, not teenagers, and many of them are women.

"When the Democrats control the Senate, one of the first pieces of legislation we'll see is an increase in the minimum wage," said Kennedy.

His proposal would have increased the minimum wage to $5.85 beginning 60 days after the legislation was enacted; to $6.55 one year later; and to $7.25 a year after that. He said inflation has eroded the value of the current $5.15 minimum wage by 20 percent.

With the help of a few rebellious Republicans, House Democrats on the House Appropriations Committee succeeded in attaching a minimum wage increase last week to legislation providing funding for federal social programs. Fearing that the House would pass the measure with the increase intact, the GOP leadership swiftly decided to sidetrack the entire bill.

"I am opposed to it, and I think a vast majority of our (rank and file) is opposed to it," House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Tuesday.

Pressed by reporters, he said, "There are limits to my willingness to just throw anything out on the floor."

On Wednesday, his spokesman, Kevin Madden, said Boehner has told fellow Republicans "the House will have to deal with this some way." He said no decisions had been made.

While Democrats depend on organized labor to win elections, Republicans are closely aligned with business interests that oppose any increase in the federal wage floor or would like changes in the current system.

Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, offered an alternative that proposed a minimum wage increase of $1.10 over 18 months, in two steps.

The increase was coupled with a variety of provisions offering regulatory or tax relief to small businesses, including one to exempt enterprises with less than $1 million in annual receipts from the federal wage and hour law entirely. The current exemption level is $500,000, and a Republican document noted the amount had "lagged behind inflation."

Additionally, Republicans proposed a system of optional "flextime" for workers, a step that Enzi said would allow employees, at their discretion, to work more than 40 hours one week in exchange for more time off the next. Unions generally oppose such initiatives, and the Republican plan drew 45 votes, with 53 in opposition.

But in a private morning meeting, Republicans raised objections that forced House leaders to yank the bill from the floor.

One concern had its roots in the bill's origins. The legislation requires nine states with a documented history of discrimination against black voters - such as poll taxes and literacy tests - to get Justice Department approval for their election laws.

Another objection, a spillover from the contentious debate on immigration, had to do with requirements in some states for ballots printed in several languages and the presence of interpreters at polling places where large numbers of citizens speak limited English.

Some members of the Republican caucus also suggested delaying the debate until the Supreme Court issued a ruling in a controversial 2003 Texas redistricting case. That decision, expected in the next two weeks, will examine the issue of whether Latino voters were disenfranchised.

Whatever the fuel, Wednesday's delay set off a series of brush fires on Capitol Hill.

"It was heated," said Rep. Scott Garrett (R-N.J.), who supports an amendment by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) to end a requirement for bilingual ballots in jurisdictions where at least 5% of the population speaks a language other than English. "I've been in meetings for two hours. There are meetings going on all over the Hill."

Officially, House Republican leaders said in a statement that they were "committed to passing the Voting Rights Act legislation as soon as possible." Unofficially, some aides said the leadership might schedule the vote again after the July 4 recess.

Although dismayed by the delay, Democrats seized the chance to spotlight the rare public dissension in Republican ranks.

"I hope that the Republicans will be able to quickly resolve their differences and that the Congress will be able to pass this vital legislation," said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco). "It is critical that we do so as soon as possible, because our democracy depends on protecting the right of every American citizen to vote."

"Apparently, the leadership of the Republican Party cannot bring its own rank-and-file members into line to support the Voting Rights Act," said Rep. Artur Davis (D-Ala.), who represents Selma and Birmingham - the sites of seminal events in the civil rights movement that produced the bill in 1965. "That ought to be a significant embarrassment as they fan around the country trying to skim off a few black votes in the next four months."

Part of the problem, according to some GOP congressional aides, was that the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.), was unavailable to answer questions and allay concerns. In addition, they said, he consulted more often with his Senate counterparts than with members of his own party during deliberations over the bill.

In a statement issued later Wednesday, Sensenbrenner defended both the bill and the process. "Some members, whom I believe are misinformed, have expressed concerns about voting on this legislation now," he said.

Noting that the committee has held 12 hearings and amassed more than 12,000 pages of testimony, Sensenbrenner said the bill was one Republicans and Democrats could be "proud of because it ensures that when discriminatory practices of the past resurface, they are quickly put to rest. I hope the House leadership will bring [the bill] to the floor in the near future."

Sensenbrenner thinks opponents "keep moving the goal post," said an aide who asked not to be identified. Some of the issues being raised - such as bilingual ballots - first came up in committee, where efforts to change them were defeated, the aide said.

The House delay could complicate matters in the Senate, where Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) had planned to bring up an identical bill next week before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The effort to amend the requirement that nine states clear election laws with the Justice Department was led by Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-Ga.). The requirement, he argued, unfairly singled out Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia.

Others saw the vote as a vehicle to address the growing language gap in American culture. After waking up to headlines suggesting that House leaders were delaying President Bush's push to overhaul immigration laws, Garrett said he hit the telephones to rouse his constituents.

"I've been on the talk radio circuit in the last 24 hours just to get the message out to let their representatives know how they feel," he said. "If we have until after the Fourth, the issue will resonate with the base."

Minority and advocacy groups will also likely rally in coming weeks.

"The notion that a handful of Republicans from Southern states can rally enough support to hijack reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act is a slap in the face," said Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles). "This delay is inexcusable."