The Switkay USA Economic Vitality Index increased 4.35 points to reach a level of 78.01 for the 1st quarter of 2015, the highest level of the index since the 3rd quarter of 2009. This came despite a decrease in real GDP per capita of 0.8%. In addition, M2 velocity was at its lowest recorded level of 1.500.

Two factors improved notably during the 1st quarter. The trade-weighted value of the dollar rose nearly 5%, perhaps due to quantitative easing in Europe. Also, mean household net worth increased a bit more than 2%.

The Switkay USA Economic Vitality Index is a function of the following variables:
·         real gross domestic product per capita;
·         total Federal debt as a percentage of gross domestic product;
·         the U6 unemployment rate (including those working part-time who would prefer full-time work);
·         mean weeks of unemployment;
·         average hourly earnings, production and non-supervisory employees, private;
·         US population;
·         the civilian labor force participation rate;
·         the consumer price index, all urban consumers;
·         the velocity of the M2 money stock;
·         the real trade-weighted exchange value of the US dollar (broad index);
·         real net worth of households and non-profits.

It is updated at the end of every quarter, when data for the previous quarter become finalized. We use the word real to mean inflation-adjusted. All data is taken from FRED, the research service of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. The index is normalized so that its median value in the years 1973 to 2008 is 100.

What would the United States Senate look like if Senate seats were allocated in proportion to states' areas, rather than the equal allocation we have today? The map above shows the result, using the Adams method of allocation.

In the Adams method, every state is guaranteed at least one Senate seat, even though it may constitute considerably less than 1% of the total area of the United States. Consequently, larger states like Alaska lose a bit of representation; Alaska constitutes more than 16% of the area of the US, but only gets 12 Senate seats.

Eight states see their Senate representation increase to more than 2 seats; 21 states stay the same; and 21 states lose representation, going down to one senator. Since a Constitutional amendment can be blocked by 13 states, the map above is unlikely to become reality.

What purpose would be served by such an allocation? Recall that in American history, some states have been formed out of other states. For example: Delaware was part of Pennsylvania during the colonial period; Maine was a colony of Massachusetts; Vermont was part of New York; West Virginia seceded from Virginia; etc. More to the point, Californians recently considered a proposal to partition the state into 6 new states.

Any time a state divides, the combined representation of the new states in the House of Representatives will remain about the same, because it is proportional to population. However, the new states would get two senators each, increasing the proportion of their combined representation in the Senate. Thus the Constitution provides an incentive for states to split. Texas has 254 counties, more than any other state. If all the counties chose to become independent states, they would together control the Senate.

By choosing to allocate senators by area, rather than equally, we remove the constitutional incentive of states to split (although they may still wish to split for other reasons).