In 2016, 1.2 million Coloradans voted for Donald Trump to become president.

All those Colorado votes for Trump resulted in zero electoral votes. Instead, all nine of the state’s electoral votes went to Hillary Clinton because Trump voters were not the majority in Colorado. Votes for Trump ended on the figurative cutting-room floor.

Proposition 113, titled “Adopt Agreement to Elect U.S. President by National Popular Vote,” aims to change how Colorado deploys its electoral votes. It would make sure every Coloradan’s vote in a presidential race counts — regardless of which candidate wins the state’s popular vote.

We think it’s a practical way to address some of the deficiencies of the Electoral College without tinkering with the Electoral College itself. Eliminating the Electoral College in favor of a direct popular vote would be a cumbersome undertaking because it would require amending the U.S. Constitution.

Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution grants states the sole authority to appoint electors. Our state’s General Assembly used that authority to pass a law in 2019 signed by the governor that commits Colorado to an interstate compact that only becomes binding when participating states represent at least 270 electoral votes.

If Colorado voters approve Proposition 113, Colorado would be the 15th state, plus the District of Columbia, to join the compact, bringing the number of committed electoral votes to 196, still short of the 270 needed for the compact to go into effect.

So what happens when the compact reaches 270 electoral votes? Then, each of the states in the compact would pledge their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote, regardless of which candidate carried any individual state. And those 270 electoral votes represent the margin of victory of the 538 votes in the Electoral College. The states in the compact would exercise their authority under the U.S. Constitution to guarantee that the winner of the national popular vote will become the president, thus achieving the “one person, one vote” ideal of equal representation.

Those opposed to Colorado joining the compact gathered enough signatures to get a measure on the ballot asking voters whether they approve of Senate Bill 19-042. It’s a unique provision of our state constitution that allows voters to repeal what they consider a bad law. Proposition 113 represents an opportunity for a citizens’ veto. A “no” vote on 113 is to reject SB19-042. We’re urging a “yes” vote.

Opponents to 113, like our own Rose Pugliese, say the compact robs Colorado of its voice — that we’re giving away our votes to populous states. We think that’s misleading.

National Popular Vote, Inc. has broken down the numbers and they’re remarkably even. The largest 100 cities have one-sixth of the U.S. population and they vote 63 percent Democratic. Rural areas contain one-sixth of the population and they vote 63 percent Republican. The remaining two-thirds of the country live in the suburbs and are evenly divided politically. So there shouldn’t be an urban power grab.

The top five most populous states (California, Texas, Florida, New York and Pennsylvania in that order) split their votes virtually 50/50 between the Republican and Democratic presidential candidates, even though none of those votes matter under the current system.

For example, there are millions of Republican voters in California who know their votes for president don’t matter. They’re in the same boat as Colorado’s Trump supporters. The National Popular Vote compact will ensure that Republican votes in blue states and Democratic votes in red states will actually count. The true voice of Colorado is all of its voters, not just those in the majority.

Pugliese contends that approving 113 surrenders Colorado’s “political clout.” That would be true, perhaps, if Colorado were still a battleground state. But it has voted blue in the last three presidential elections — again, leaving Republicans out in the cold. Colorado is a fly-over state now, not because of its population compared to any other state, but because of its bluish tint.

Pugliese also worries that SB19-042 opens the door for Californians to take Colorado’s water rights. We think this is a misplaced concern. It’s Congress, not presidents, with the constitutional authority to negotiate or approve interstate water compacts.

Still, Pugliese’s bottom line is that she wants Coloradans to be in charge of Colorado’s vote. And she’s essentially achieved that goal in helping put Proposition 113 on the ballot. The people of Colorado, not the legislature, will decide whether we’re being well-served under the current winner-take-all system. For that, she deserves enormous credit because this question should have been sent to the voters from the beginning.

What’s interesting is that the Electoral College could very well evolve into a system that almost ensures Democratic victories. If Texas, Georgia, Arizona and Florida start to tilt blue, there’s almost no path for a Republican victory — even if the GOP candidate wins the national popular vote.

If voters reject 113, we wouldn’t be surprised to see the idea resurrected in a few election cycles.