I very much support this proposal, having been wanting static jumps for a long time. It will also let me pull these jumps out of EIP-2315, including this EIP by reference.
My only worry is that it may be too soon to be removing JUMPDEST. The pros are clear - more speed, less space, saved gas. The cons are, as you say, that JUMPDEST serves some purposes.
EVM code can be parsed into basic blocks in one pass – because JUMPDESTs (and other control-flow instructions) delimit basic blocks. Otherwise a preliminary pass is needed to find the destinations (such as jumpdest analysis). Tools can take advantage of this, including disassemblers, compilers, and interpreters. And human writers and readers.
Whether the pros outweigh the cons in the end isn’t clear to me, but getting more experience with these operations and getting feedback from toolmakers and others seems worth the wait.