I still think the line item veto is a good idea. It would probably extend the passage time for spending bills, because each individual cut would have to be lobbied, but I still think in the long run it's one of those rare things that would make the system more honest. I know what you are saying about cutting the pork of the opposition - but that would be geared more towards protecting voting blocks, not any proprietary causes in most cases. For that reason, I doubt many Presidents want it either. Perhaps it can be re-introduced in a different form to make it through the SC.
Everybody says they want change, but whenever a mechanism for change is suggested most jump up and shout no, for whatever reason. Getting rid of an administration you don't like and installing your warm fuzzy feeling of choice doesn't guarantee nor even imply any changes in the process. The Patriot Act comes to mind. Flawed in ways, but everyone wanted more security and when this popped up (looked at by many people who know why security is flawed) the masses screamed "NOOOOOOO". Why? It affects a perceived change of the individual right to do whatever we want, and that isn't even the issue.
It's not just "Bush" or "Clinton", it's supposedly the people's government, and most people don't do much more than TIVO and complain.