No, it's not in the "same spirit" at all. There is a reason for STATE'S rights and not "district's rights" or "region's rights." As originally conceived, the Senate was to be the guardian of the state interests in Washington, while the House was to be the guardian of the people's interests. Likewise, the electoral college was designed to prevent more populous states from running roughshod over less populated states. If you read the debates over the constitution, there is NOTHING about cities vs. country, or regions. The state was the defining entity.
Ultimately, the Founders would say if you don't like it, move like they did to other states.
Likewise, the electoral college was designed to prevent more populous states from running roughshod over less populated states.I understand that- and it does nothing to remove any right from the state whatsoever. The state still determines the electors, still runs the show. How does this damage the state at all?
It does naught but to restore some representation to rural areas of that state, within the state's sovereignty.
Our fathers were some pretty smart folks, but I doubt they could foresee a time when a city became so populous as to overpower the state electorally. Especially so when considering the size of Western/Midwestern states.