I'm still struggling with whether or not I agree with the New Deal. The same goes for LBJ's great society. One of the key factors is what the word "represent" means. The government represents us and our interests. Does that mean it's supposed to do whatever we say, or do what is actually in our best interests?
I recently watched an episode of Firing Line where William F Buckley interviewed Edward F. Prichard, who served in FDR's administration, and had near-daily contact with him. It was fascinating watching the two viewpoints collide. When Buckley asked about FDR's third and fourth term, and whether the Prichard agreed with the 22nd amendment (term limits). Buckley clearly thought that term limits and other power limitations were good, whereas the Prichard insisted that we shouldn't curb the will of the people.
This video was filmed nearly 40 years ago, and the federal government has greatly expanded since then. Most of this is because of 9/11, although every president has created a slew of their own. Is this growth appropriate in light of the growing population? Is it a necessary shield against corporate powers, so we don't repeat another Gilded Age? If the federal government needs to expand, is it doing so at the expense of local governments? If the purpose of government is to represent, then why do so many people feel their voices aren't being heard?
To be fair, this set of questions has existed since the founding of the country, when we had tension between the north and south over states rights. Buckley and Prichard characterized this tension as Hamiltonians vs Jeffersonians, or Federalists vs Anti-Federalists. Strong central government vs weaker central government.