Chance Fading for Bipartisan Deal on Reapportionment : Politics: Brown says it would be better for the Supreme Court to draw district lines than for Democrats to surrender Assembly control to the Republicans.

Chances for bipartisan agreement on new legislative and congressional districts for the 1990s dimmed Monday when Democratic Assembly Speaker Willie Brown said he intended to push a Democrat-drawn plan through the Legislature’s lower house.

Although it was not described in any detail, Brown said the plan he favors was not substantially different from earlier versions that Republicans said were certain to be vetoed by Gov. Pete Wilson.

Unless Brown agrees to additional changes that would satisfy Wilson, it appeared that the task of drawing new districts to account for population shifts detected in the 1990 Census will fall to the courts.

Brown, who spoke in an interview as the state Senate was giving nearly unanimous approval to its proposed plan, said he had given up hope of reaching agreement with Wilson and Assembly Republican Leader Bill Jones of Fresno.

“Not from Day 1 did I believe that the governor and Jones wanted to do anything except have me deliver the Democratic Party to them,” Brown said. “I, of course, was not going to do that.”

Brown said he was worried that Democratic incumbents would be displaced if the state Supreme Court draws the new districts. But he said he would rather take that risk than cave in to Republican demands.

Democrats control 47 of the Assembly’s 80 seats, with Republicans holding 31. Two vacancies are expected to go to Republicans in special elections today. For the new plan, Republicans are said to be insisting on three more secure seats, for a total of 36, plus the ability to win six or eight more.

“No one will come to me and say, ‘Take the control of the house given to you by the voters and give it to us,’ ” Brown said. “They (Republicans) want me to turn the operation over to them.”

Jones, in a separate interview, said he suspected Brown’s move could be a bluff intended to get Republicans to back down.

“We are not going to blink,” Jones said.

Jones acknowledged that, like Brown, some Republican incumbents also might be uncomfortable going to court because of the uncertainty for sitting office-holders. But he said the alternative--agreeing to Brown’s plan--would be worse.

“There is not one Republican incumbent who is willing to accept a permanent minority position in the Assembly,” Jones said. “Our concern as a party is to make sure that we have an opportunity at some point in the decade to be successful.”

Brown and Jones spoke with The Times before the start of a Senate-Assembly conference committee that was supposed to combine the plans for new Senate, Assembly, congressional and Board of Equalization districts.

At the hearing, Brown scolded representatives of a leading Latino rights group for proposing a plan that could improve minority representation but leave the Democrats short of a majority of 41 in the 80-member Assembly. In the long run, he argued, such a scenario would be worse for minorities.

Brown said: “You could elect five African Americans, eight Chicanos, and 38 Democrats and be right in the toilet when it comes to designating people on the Ways and Means Committee or designating people to chair committees or designating or hiring staff. You don’t have responsibility for factoring that in and you are not factoring that in. That is a tragedy because the political process lends itself to (those) kinds of considerations and they are real, friend, they are absolutely real.”

Replied Arturo Vargas of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund: “You’re right. We did not factor in partisan politics.”

Two alternative Assembly plans released Monday appear to divide the territory now represented by Assemblyman Tom Hayden (D-Santa Monica) among several districts, substantially reducing his reelection chances. But Hayden said he intends to run for reelection in whatever district includes Santa Monica.

Also on Monday, Rep. Howard Berman (D-Los Angeles), who is leading the congressional Democrats’ line-drawing efforts, made public amended proposals for congressional districts that would transform the seat now held by Democratic Rep. Glenn M. Anderson of San Pedro into a Republican-leaning district.

“This is a painful decision,” Berman said. “This is one of our colleagues.”

But these details will be of little consequence if Assembly Democrats pass a plan on a partisan vote that is sure to be vetoed by the governor. Because the Assembly plan will be tied to the Senate and congressional proposals, such a strategy presumably would doom all three to a veto.

To become law, all three plans must be approved by both houses of the Legislature. If Wilson vetoes the legislation, lawmakers could override his action with a two-thirds vote in both houses.

The Senate plan, passed on a 37-0 vote Monday, transforms two districts now held by Democrats--Cecil Green of Norwalk and Rose Ann Vuich of Dinuba--into seats that would almost certainly be won by Republicans. It creates an additional Latino-dominated seat in Los Angeles County. Other than that, the plan bolsters the partisan advantage of nearly every Senate incumbent who was in danger of a serious challenge from the opposition party.

Sen. Art Torres (D-Los Angeles) said the plan reflected the increasing minority populations of what he called the “New California.”

Senate President Pro Tem David A. Roberti, a Los Angeles Democrat, rejected criticism that the plan protects almost every incumbent.

“It is hardly incumbent protection,” he said. “Some of the current members of this house will have to move if they intend to seek reelection. At least a quarter of the membership will have large numbers of new and uncertain voters in their districts.”

One such incumbent is Ralph C. Dills (D-Gardena), whose district was split to create the new Latino seat in Los Angeles County. Rather than retire, Dills, the 81-year-old senior member of the Legislature, said he plans to seek another term. He will run in an adjacent district where he is less well known.

Dills noted that two of this brothers, Clayton, a former assemblymen, and Curly, a legislative employee, died after they retired. “I don’t know whether retirement had anything to do with it, but I don’t want to take that chance,” he said in a Senate speech.

Times staff writer Mark Gladstone contributed to this story.