Opinion: John Curtis’ victory shows the path forward for Republicans on climate. Environmental leaders should take note

In one of election night’s least surprising outcomes, Congressman John Curtis (R-UT) cruised to victory in the race to succeed Mitt Romney as the junior senator from Utah. This follows his decisive primary win in June, where he secured nearly 50% of the vote in a four-way race.
While Curtis’ victory in a solidly red state may have been expected, it sends a crucial message that deserves more attention, in conservative and environmental circles alike: leading on climate and the environment is no longer the political liability it once was for Republicans. Curtis’ ascendance to the Senate as a Republican from a deeply conservative state, and as one of the most vocal conservative climate champions, underscores the shifting politics of the issue and the growing prospects for greater conservative climate leadership.
In recent years, Congressman Curtis has emerged as the foremost Republican voice in our national climate dialogue. In 2021, recognizing the party’s loss of young voters due to a lack of constructive climate engagement, he founded the Conservative Climate Caucus — which now counts nearly 90 House Republicans among its ranks — to provide a space for GOP lawmakers and their staffs to educate themselves on the issue and collaborate on practical, pro-growth solutions.
Rather than shy away from a topic that, in recent decades, has been anathema for many conservatives, Curtis chose to distance himself from past skepticism and tackle it head-on. Through the Caucus, he has worked to develop a credible narrative and policy approach that acknowledges the imperative to address climate change without sacrificing conservative, limited-government principles. As his electoral success demonstrates, this approach has thus far paid off.
What does this conservative climate agenda look like?
It means championing an “all-of-the-above” approach to energy that promotes American-made clean energy as a foundation for the future, while acknowledging that American oil and gas — among the cleanest produced on Earth — will remain essential to meet growing energy demands as we continue innovating and developing new technologies.
It means acknowledging that our greatest adversaries — especially China — use heavily polluting energy to fund their repressive regimes and wreak havoc globally, and supporting economic and trade measures to compel foreign actors to play by the rules and compete fairly. Curtis’ recently introduced PROVE IT Act is a significant step in this direction.
It means leveraging government policy to foster scientific research and innovation in clean energy and technology — especially nuclear energy — and supporting efforts to make fossil fuel production cleaner, including through carbon capture and storage.
And it means supporting nature-based solutions that promote sustainable water use, forest management and responsible use of public lands, and recognizing that these solutions are best implemented through free enterprise, not top-down government regulations.
Even environmental leaders who are skeptical of Republican engagement on climate can surely find elements of this agenda they agree with — indeed, some of these ideas already enjoy broad bipartisan support.
Critics will point out that, notwithstanding Curtis’s positive engagement on the topic, the gap between liberals and conservatives on climate policy remains large, and there is not yet enough Republican support for concrete policies needed to decarbonize at speed and scale. We agree, and recognize that Republicans still have a long way to go on this issue. Still, we are hopeful and optimistic that Curtis’ Senate victory signals the tides are turning and that we could soon surpass a political tipping point that sees more Republican candidates and lawmakers recognizing the political opportunities in being environmentally minded conservatives and following Curtis’ lead.
Democrats and their allies in the climate movement should take note and heed the lessons of Curtis’ journey to this point. His increasing engagement on the issue did not come in spite of his conservative principles but rather because of them. Further, his interest and passion in the topic was not driven by pressure from liberal voices and environmental groups, but by trusted, local conservative messengers, including many of the young Republicans our organizations engage and work with.
We see this as the most promising pathway to greater Republican leadership on this issue, and one environmental leaders and philanthropists should support, especially given how under-resourced right-of-center climate engagement efforts currently are.
Ultimate success in tackling climate change may depend on it too. Given the rarity of unified control of government, and the imperative for real, imminent solutions, bipartisanship is likely essential for making meaningful progress on climate. And, as is true in so many cases, our country’s national policy is made better and more durable when both parties come together to forge true bipartisan compromise.
Building a stronger contingent of climate-minded Republicans will not be easy and will require sustained effort in the years to come, but Curtis’s victory shows us it is ultimately possible. His story offers both a roadmap for GOP lawmakers from red states and districts to step forward into the national climate dialogue and a blueprint for environmental advocates to build towards consensus on this critical challenge.
We should seize this opportunity and use the example of John Curtis to cultivate more climate-minded Republicans and create a political environment where addressing climate change is a winning strategy regardless of party or ideology. If we can achieve that, America can truly rise to the occasion on this seminal challenge.