There is a push — a big push — to have state legislatures across our land rethink the way electoral votes are cast, and we see the wisdom of collectively moving our presidential election to one determined by the national popular vote.

It is a monumental decision to change your mind about a political or social issue. Especially one you’ve defended repeatedly, but we can no longer defend an electoral college system in the name of giving Colorado, and a handful of other swing states, an outsized voice in the presidential election. Every American deserves to cast a vote that is worth exactly one vote, no more, no less.

The movement is called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Colorado Democrats are on the verge of joining that compact and adding our state to a growing list of places that have said, definitively, it’s time for the electoral college system to change.

Once enough states join the compact, with their electoral votes adding up to 270 (the amount needed for a presidential candidate to win), the compact would force our future presidents to be elected by a popular vote.

We are not endorsing this massive change as a knee jerk reaction to President Donald Trump — after all the president himself has said that had the election been a popular vote, he would have campaigned differently and still won. Instead, our endorsement follows a thoughtful analysis that found joining this compact would eliminate a system that has created vast inequities when it comes to political sway over the executive branch.

This is not an effort to change or amend the Constitution. The founders, in their infinite wisdom, gave state legislatures the power to decide how to use their electoral votes. For this nation’s first two elections there was little conflict in the Electoral College: George Washington was the first and only president to be elected unanimously by the electoral college. But by 1800, states had become entrenched in their politics and had figured out how to play the system: make all the electors vote for one candidate, their candidate. In succeeding elections, in a domino effect, states changed to winner-takes-all votes based on each state’s majority.

It’s impossible to say who would have won in past elections had candidates been vying for the national popular vote instead of focusing on swing states, but we can say definitively that outcomes would not have been based on the decision of a handful of voters in a handful of states.

This is a bipartisan effort, even though it may not appear that way in our legislature. It has been passed in 11 states and the District of Columbia so far. It needs only 98 more electoral votes to be implemented. State legislatures can change their minds in future elections, but cannot pass new electoral rules close to presidential elections.

The Denver Post editorial board has historically opposed changing the Electoral College system. But the time has come to change our mind. Millions of voters aren’t counted in the most important election our country — the nation that has served as a symbol of democracy to the world — has to offer.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.