In addition to the Constitutional complaints I have against the imperial presidency, another objection is that the expansion of Executive Branch authority does not yield very effective results. presidents do not legislate well.
Presidents tend to create programs which impact their election or that of their proteges. Unlike Congress, with a staggered, perpetual election cycle and internecine conflict, presidents have a fixed, finite period to accomplish something and that urgency to do something flashy often yields silly, poorly imagined results that are unfunded and in retrospect seem questionable (think George W. Bush's expansion of the prescription drug benefit).
This is because we have made the presidency into a democratic institution, and democracy (a word never used in the Constitution or Declaration of Independence- you'll hear me repeat this regularly) does not lend itself to long-term, well intentioned planning.
After the Electoral College was abandonded in the early part of the 18th century the presidency became essentially an at large election. As such, incumbent presidents seeking reelection appeal not to electors but to the voting public at large- a direct democratic appeal. The Founders opposed such an order, prefering instead that electors act as representatives of the population (in fact, of the executive authority of the individual states) to choose a president.
The reason is simple.
Voters choose what is best for them. Representatives, in theory, choose what is best. A republican form of government (which the Constitution expresly does require) promotes professional governance.
This is ironic considering the current, ongoing complaints from the left that there is no civility in Congress and that partisanship is destroying the ability to "get things done." (Of course, their idea of "getting things done" is passing measures which offend the Constitution, like war without declarations and bills which compel persons to buy a service or be charged a fine.)
If the left genuinely wants to improve the quality of government services, we should revert to a truly republican form of government. Under this structure, Congress would pass laws and the president, answerable to profesisonal voters (electors) would concentrate on intelligently executing the law rather than acting as a King Congressman, cleverly skirting seperation limitations with Executive Orders and Signing Statements so as to carryout populist actions.
What we need is not more laws, but better execution of existing ones (and frankly, a massive contraction of the existing federal government).
Sensible libertarian views on nearly everything- except foreign affairs.