In Ogden, Utah, both Republican candidate John Curtis and Democratic challenger Caroline Gleich are vying for the open U.S. Senate seat previously held by Mitt Romney. During a recent debate, both candidates articulated their plans to address climate change and protect Utah’s natural resources, with Curtis serving as the leader of the Conservative Climate Caucus in Congress and Gleich framing herself as a climate activist and mountaineer. Gleich, who represents a newer generation of environmental advocates, criticized Curtis for not adequately addressing the climate crisis, highlighting that younger voters are increasingly anxious about their future and urging a departure from the status quo in politics. At 38 years old, she sees herself as an underdog in Utah, which has not elected a Democrat to the Senate since 1970, yet emphasizes the need for progressive change.
The stakes are high for both candidates to succeed Romney, who is recognized for his moderate stance and criticism of former President Donald Trump. Romney reiterated this week that he will not support Trump, positioning himself separate from other Republicans who have endorsed the former president’s candidacy. His departure opens up the political landscape in Utah, where voters typically lean toward moderate Republicans. Curtis, at 64 years old, has sometimes mirrored Romney’s approach by pushing back against Trump-aligned narratives that deny the existence of climate change, which is a significant issue within the Republican Party.
Curtis is framing himself as a climate advocate through a conservative lens, focusing on market-driven solutions to environmental issues. During the campaign, Curtis emphasized the urgent situation of the Great Salt Lake, which is shrinking due to climate change and water diversion, threatening both public health and agriculture. His approach aims to protect jobs within the agricultural sector while advocating for innovative, market-based strategies to reduce emissions and promote sustainable water management. By safeguarding agricultural interests, Curtis believes he can unite various stakeholders for comprehensive solutions to the state’s environmental challenges.
Conversely, Gleich is positioning herself as a champion for swift action on climate change, advocating for a more aggressive stance on water conservation and the recognition of water as a finite resource in the West. Her campaign seeks to raise awareness about the environmental crises affecting Utah and to galvanize voters around more progressive environmental policies. She is particularly focused on addressing issues such as water conservation and pushing for electric vehicle infrastructure investments, distinguishing her approach from Curtis’s by calling for a phase-out of fossil fuel subsidies.
Interestingly, Curtis has garnered support from environmental groups typically aligned with Democrats, such as EDF Action, providing a complex backdrop to the primary dynamics. This endorsement indicates a potential alignment with certain conservative strategies that contend with climate change while striving to protect economic interests in fossil fuel. Despite this support, Gleich has criticized Curtis for his previous votes against key climate initiatives, framing his actions as catering to the fossil fuel industry rather than positioning Utah as a leader in clean energy and environmental responsibility.
As the election approaches, it is clear that environmental issues will play an essential role in persuading voters in Utah. The contrasting plans for addressing climate change, stemming from Curtis’s more conservative approach and Gleich’s progressive stance, highlight the evolving political landscape in a state that has traditionally favored moderate Republican candidates. The upcoming election not only serves as a referendum on the candidates themselves but also addresses how Utah can navigate future environmental challenges and economic opportunities in a rapidly changing climate.