New reporting from Alaska Public Media reveals Sullivan refused to answer a question about why he pocketed $6,400 in Pebble Mine campaign cash he promised to donate.
New reporting from Alaska Public Media reveals that Dan Sullivan abruptly cut and ran off a live Q&A during a video meeting after being asked about his broken promise to donate Pebble Mine-tied campaign contributions to charity.
Sullivan was pressed on his broken promises during a ComFish public Q&A session: “Why did you break your pledge to return the money you took from the Pebble Mine CEO?”
Sullivan’s response: “I gotta run.” Sullivan then abruptly left the call, denying Alaskans the answers they deserve.
The question followed reporting last week that also revealed Sullivan has continued to take campaign cash from a top executive of the widely opposed Pebble Mine project that threatens the world’s largest sockeye salmon fishery in Bristol Bay.
Alaska Public Media’s Alaska At-Large: Stay skeptical, my friends
April 17, 2026
In 2020, Sen. Sullivan pledged to forfeit all campaign contributions from then-CEO of Pebble, Tom Collier. That followed a cringe-inducing whopper of a scandal, featuring secret tapes. Collier bragged about his influence over Alaska politicians, saying he had Sullivan “sitting over in a corner and being quiet.”
“I’ve directed my campaign team to donate his contributions to charity,” Sullivan said in a 2020 debate, citing Collier’s “unethical practices.”
I asked the Sullivan campaign this week if that money – $6,400 by my count – was ever given to charity. I’m still waiting.
Sullivan was asked about his promise just this week, at ComFish. It was at the end of a public Zoom session, just after Sullivan said he had to go.
“Why did you break your pledge to return the money you took from the Pebble Mine CEO?” someone on the Zoom asked.
“I gotta run. Thanks,” Sullivan responded.
[…] Sullivan is still taking campaign money from Pebble’s CEO. The current executive, John Shively, gave one $500 contribution in December and another in February. Sullivan opponents say the money suggests Sullivan might have softened his opposition to the controversial mine, which his campaign denies.
Shively shrugged off aspersions when I ran into him in Washington this week.
“And I think Dan Sullivan is doing a good job,” Shively told me.
It’s too cynical to say that campaign contributions induce an officeholder to do the giver’s bidding. Quid pro quo is rare.
I still believe that. But I believe it less after listening to the Pebble Tapes.