Sure. The rules were never play-tested. It's hardly surprising that they're subject to all kinds of attacks.<p>It hardly seems important, compared to the general problem that democracy is a terrible way of doing things. The Constitution permits all kinds of abusive shenanigans without exploiting amendments.<p>My gripe here is actually less with Gödel for pointing out the obvious, than with lawyers (of all political persuasions) who seem to think of the law as a logical exercise. All of the laws are vague compared to a computer program or logical proof. Which is fine: people are complicated, and I don't expect the laws to cover all of the cases well.<p>But when they then apply those laws as if they were rigorous, they rapidly get into absurdities and abuses. "Rigor" is no excuse when the law itself is too vague to be interpreted rigorously.