Thus far it hasn't been formally possible to retcon what the GM has stated (not post-reset anyway, some GM's who went too far pre-reset were arguably ignored, Yankee probably remembers this better than I). It has made sense in so far as we've had reliable GM's or people who, while not perfect, maintain at least a semblance of impartiality or a desire to remain at least somewhat realistic.
Crane could certainly have gone much further than he did and, should this become law, there's only one specific point I'd raise before the Senate for their approval. Nonetheless, I think the precedent sent for a GM being part of a conspiracy and/or destructive effort - we can quibble about the specifics, the general principle is what matters - showcases why absoute power poses a potential issue for the future. Normally a GM that would go rogue would not be confirmed in the first place, but you never know.
I can outline similar thoughts in a more detailed fashion, but without wanting to introduce too much in Senate debate, I think this is a useful safeguard in the short term, at least until the Game Engine is reformed. I'd certainly prefer a context in which a future and firm consensus can repair damage caused by any successor in this office.
The best example would be then GM Adam Griffin's alien storyline which was certainly creative and different. However, I believe it was Simfan or someone else became GM and cancelled this storyline.
At the time I opposed this action because I wanted the GM to be more than just the person everyone outsourced their number calculations to.
As to the issue with consolidated and absolute power, you are speaking to the choir when it comes to me, but if there is one place where splitting up power is most difficult, it is the GM.
