I love this, even if it’s too conservative when it comes to preserving existing state boundaries. Why is Nevada so recognizable? It would be better to see this map reflect concentrated populations only; coastal Washington and Oregon together, for example. To see one enormous state covering most of eastern Montana, both Dakota and Wyoming would be cool. “Bitterroot” is largely Denver-plus-wasteland. Pretty wasteland, though.
I don’t know that I would use some of these twee-ass names, either (Sohio?) although others, like Llano Estacado and Pamlico are good. What would be interesting would be to create a map based on every census.
In 1930, NYC was home to 5.6% of all Americans (as opposed to 2.7% today) and would therefore require almost three states to itself. California would have had to be part of a “larger” state until around 1900 when it contained 2% of the country and would have momentarily adopted its actual borders before blowing past them. (It’s all or part of 7 states in this map). You could really see the enormous, dislocating shifts in this country.
UPDATE: I would guess that redrawing the states this way wouldn’t necessarily lead to a dramatically more progressive Senate–there are just too many Southern states in this framework.