Congressional Proof

Question about Congressional vs Presidential power?

A few years ago Bush asked the Congress for ‘authority’ to go into Iraq which was essentially granted, tho there was no specific declaration of war. This was an open ended authority in that it would now require a difficult veto proof super majority for Congress to revoke that authority now.
At the time the authority was granted, is there any reason that Congress could not have added a proviso that said that Congress will only grant the authority under the condition that Congress would have the right in future to revoke the authority with only a bare majority vote in both Houses.
Of course Bush could have refused to sign on to any such conditions, but then Congress would also have the right to deny Bush the authority he sought. The point is that Congress was in a much stronger position viv a vis the Presidency before authority was granted than after.
In the future, is there any legal or constitutional obstacle for Congress to put a President (Dem or Rep)on a tighter leash?

http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/59/19450

A little news story about how Bush gets around Congress when he needs to. If the legislative and judicial branches don’t reign the executive branch in, we will be living in a police state soon.

Vote Peter Schiff – Proof that Linda McMahon is NOT conservative!