tcptacek is correct: there is some need for government action here ahead of a crisis. The internet, while doing vastly more good than harm, has also created systemic risks which need to be proactively managed. Waiting for a catastrophe is howling mad.

I'm much more concerned with how "emergency" is defined. Ideally I'd like to see both executive and judicial involvement in mucking around with the net, since in addition to defending the nation under attack you are also effectively constraining hundreds of millions of people's civil rights in various ways at the same time. That's a little too much power for one schmuck and anything that might be called an emergency.