I disagree with your premise that agricultural and extraction workers have some higher intrinsic value compared to urban dwellers, but even if you accept that premise, it is immediately undermined by California.

California is an both a service economy and agricultural powerhouse, the number one producer of agricultural value in the US by far. Other states with heavily urbanized populations like like Texas, Illinois, Minnesota, Wisconsin all produce a ton of agricultural value.

Are you saying that California deserves more representation for having a lot of farms then?

Not to mention as agriculture and resource extraction industrialized and has automated, its required a smaller percentage of the labor force than ever before.

So why should the industrial base of a state have anything to do with how well citizens are represented?