Given the history of political interference that has long plagued the University of Hawai'i, the last thing anyone needs now is another showdown between lawmakers and campus administration.

After all, it took several years of struggle to win a degree of "autonomy" for the university so it could more freely manage its own affairs.

Over the years, many outside commentators have noted that unnecessary interference from "downtown," that is, the state Capitol, has kept the university from freely reaching its potential.

The latest flap involves the chairmen of the Senate and House Higher Education committees (Sen. Clayton Hee and Rep. Tommy Waters) and Interim President David McClain.

Waters and Hee have begun the progress of reviewing the university's supplementary budget request, as is their right and responsibility. As part of that work, they are demanding additional details on how the university is spending the money it already has.

The lawmakers are particularly interested in vacant positions and in the fact that McClain — following the advice of his chancellors — declined to transfer a professor of Hawaiian studies from Manoa to West O'ahu as requested by the Legislature.

McClain says this request adds up to unwanted and improper micromanagement of UH personnel decisions by the Legislature. He has a point: What is the meaning of autonomy if the Legislature can move individual positions around the university system?

Clearly, the lawmakers are aware of the stakes here. Staff writer Derrick DePledge obtained copies of an e-mail exchange between Hee's office and the Western Association of Schools and Colleges asking if this kind of budget direction could threaten the university's accreditation.

The response was that legislative interference with personnel decisions was indeed "problematic."

"This is what we understand the autonomy legislation attempted to prevent," wrote Ralph Wolff from the organization.

The university will have to understand that even under the broadest interpretation of autonomy, lawmakers have an obligation to ensure that taxpayer dollars are being spent properly. That means asking hard questions and demanding results.

But when that boils down to legislative demands for individual personnel decisions and transfers, it goes too far and indeed could threaten, if not accreditation, then at least the university's reputation for independence.