Are Emergency Government Powers Too Broad?

In college I hear of this dilemma called the"Cincinnatus vs. Caesar" dilemma. We want a leader with a sword when the wolves are at the door, but we’re terrified they won't put the sword down once the wolves are gone.

The 2022 invocation of the Emergencies Act was a massive wake-up call for a lot of Canadians because it proved that "national emergency" is a subjective term. If the threshold for "extraordinary power" starts to include economic disruption or localized protests, the ceiling for government intervention drops significantly for every future administration.

To keep "temporary" from becoming "permanent," we probably need to move past simple trust and into hard-coded structural friction:

So one way as an American I would propose a change would be like through ratcheting the supermajority:

Days 1–30: Simple majority to address the immediate crisis.

Day 31+: Requires 60% or 66% of Parliament/Legislature to agree the threat still exists.
This forces the governing party to actually convince the opposition that the "oh no" moment isn't over.

This way it hold politicians in a place where they have to be responsible with their time while making actual positive change, because if they just use it to push their parties political agenda in a super majority then the other party would hold them accountable.