History might not be kind to the Democratic majority in the state Legislature if it prevails in its effort to crack down on the governor's use of so-called "emergency powers."

Generally, these powers are available to any governor when he or she is confronted with an emergency that cannot wait for the normal process. The obvious examples are natural disasters such as a hurricane or a tsunami, in which we expect the government to act fast and resolve questions of financing and approvals later.

Today's lawmakers are not thinking about doing away with emergency gubernatorial powers entirely. The chief executive would still have the legal authority to act swiftly and virtually unilaterally in the case of an unexpected natural or man-made disaster.

Instead, legislators are targeting Gov. Linda Lingle's willingness to use emergency powers in dealing with what might be called chronic rather than acute emergencies. In particular, they are upset that Lingle used emergency powers (redirection of funds, going around the normal procurement system, permitting rules and the like) to target the state's growing homeless problem.

Frustrated lawmakers say there is nothing that could not have been done equally well by taking the matter through the regular legislative process. The Legislature can act quickly when it sees a need, they point out. Just look at the fast action to help out the Superferry.

There's no question legislators are smarting from what they see as a high-handed end-run by Lingle. But in their effort to put Lingle in her place, they may be writing a law that will come back to haunt them or a future governor, Republican or Democrat.

The proposed restrictions say periodic or long-standing social problems qualify as an emergency only if they cannot be dealt with during a regular or special session of the Legislature.

But it's not hard to imagine an economic emergency, for example, that would fall short of the traditional definition of civil disaster yet demand immediate and forceful action by the state. We've already seen examples, such as the sudden drop-off in tourism that followed the start of the Gulf War or the last oil crisis.

This kind of thing will happen again and Hawai'i's citizens will not be happy if the governor has to stand by and wait until the Legislature can be convened and given time to mull over the problem.

It comes down to a matter of trust. If there is political distrust between the current governor and current legislature, so be it. Make all the speeches necessary. But tying the hands of future governors to deal with situations we cannot even imagine today is going too far.

Jerry Burris' column appears Wednesdays in this space. See his blog at blogs.honoluluadvertiser.com/akamaipolitics. Reach him at jrryburris@yahoo.com.