For example, your #5 mentions eliminating expensive elections, but that would just move the money influence to the respective state assemblies in order to effect the same outcome. Secondly, you seem to be assuming that the 50 states are somehow operating independently - thus creating 50 possible outcomes - when in actuality they operate under the same two party system. That means not 50 states & organizing committees, but the same two parties simply focused on their assemblies.
Ultimately, the problem isn't really written words, but people. The 2A says what it says, and yet it's still infringed. You could repeal the 17th, but the corruption would remain unchanged. You're putting a lot of faith on a piece of paper, but it's only effect is who happens to be doing the interpreting & enforcement.
Each state is different. They have different economies, different geographies, different weather, different natural resources, different histories, and different motivators.
I don't think it's as simple as saying that the parties drive each state uniformly. How can we have such different state behaviors between California and West Virginia, for example? Even between Texas and Indiana, one an oil and cattle state and one a coal state.
Agricultural versus industrial, high-tech versus education, tourism versus financial.
Each state has a self-interest that will drive negotiations with other states if they can retake control of the Senate from the parties.
-PJ