Pretty flippant solution by the GP, but to your point, there has to be some consensus among the states, just as there needs to be consensus among nations, no matter how varied the size of their populations. I'm in a small state, so I don't want California and New York setting our policy just as much as you don't want China and India setting yours.
States are pretty arbitrary divisions. If California split into 66 equally populated pieces, nothing about the people or land would change, but they'd suddenly have 132 senators instead of 2, and each chunk would still have more people than Wyoming. Or they could split into 1000 pieces and have 2000 senators and completely dominate Congress. Would that be fair, do you think?
