Actually, we have 100 Senators. I'm going to use your tiny typo to float a different mathematical idea: increased representation at the federal level. I say there aren't enough senators.

My thought is that there should be 1 representative (senator or house member) for each 100,000 voters. If we assume an even 310,000,000 in US population (it isn't even, but it's close enough, I think) then that would be 3100 representatives. If 10% go to the senate, divided by state, then each state gets 6 senators. The other 2800 get apportioned by population into the house of representatives; NYC would get (at an assumed 8 million citizens) 72 representatives, and the rest of NY would get 99. My small town would get about a quarter of a representative, which is better than we get now.

I'd also make it a rule that districts must be cohesive. No more (or at least much less) gerrymandering. The ratio of the area of the smallest oval covering the district over the area of the actual district can't be over 2 (or some other small number). No more twisty outlines. And the representative districts need to fill the senatorial districts.

I'd also allow voting on neighboring districts, but with less weight: 60% from the district itself, 40% from outside. So a local nutcase can be overridden by people nearby.

If anyone sees this, let me know just how ludicrous it is.