Widening his lead in the gravitas/ideas primary, former Congressman and current gubernatorial aspirant Tom Campbell has one of the most detailed pieces on the budget you'll read anywhere in today's San Francisco Chronicle. It's refreshing to read an honest, clear-eyed view of the budget from a Republican; Campbell is the furthest thing from the obstructionists in the legislature, to which the answer to every question is: "no new taxes."

Campbell makes the case for a form of spending limit that he championed in 2005. This was a legislative constitutional amendment that he drafted but never went anywhere; Prop 76, which was defeated by voters, had some similarities, but I believe it wasn't what Campbell wanted. Campbell would never quite answer my direct questions about his true feelings about Prop 76, which was championed by his then boss, Gov. Schwarzenegger.

His explanation of his own plan is better than mine, and you should read it. Here's my take: effectively, Campbell wants to create a constitutional requirement that revenues match expenditures. Fair enough. But he would enforce it by creating a sort of budget doomsday machine -- in the form of a requirement for serious across the board cuts if the legislature and governor don't agree on a budget that balances. Such cuts take away discretion and serve as a very blunt instrument. Which, to Campbell's way of thinking, is the point. The legislature will be more responsible only if they have something valuable to lose -- their discretion over budget decisions. I still think the better way is to eliminate the two-thirds requirement on the budget and tax increases, and thus make the legislative majority and governor accountable for budget problems. But Campbell's is a plausible alternative, a pragmatic Republican approach that relies on a very big stick.