2. Proportional representation for all lower legislative chambers (along with the abolishment of every state senate)
Bicameralism is a good thing, so long as the second house is not elected in the same manner as the first.
Bicameralism is something you have in a federal system but the state governments are pretty much unitary. What are the state senates supposed to represent? Counties?
Before the 1960's that was indeed the case in a number of States, including South Carolina. (Indeed, in South Carolina, the combined delegation to the General Assembly from each county also did double duty as the county council for each county back before the one man-one vote cases made impossible keeping that useful means of keeping the number of elected offices small.) While that is no longer the case, a second house that is elected on a different schedule than the first can serve as a check on momentary political blips. Yes bicameralism can delay and impede political action, but that is more often than not a good thing.
While none of the States make use of it, another useful possibility would be to have one house elected from districts, and the other house elected on a Statewide proportional basis. Indeed, for a federal government, I favor tricameralism, with in addition to two houses elected as just described, a third house with an equal number of members selected/elected by each State, but having legislative authority only on bills that affect the State governments.
