Skip to content
Hill Policy
U.S. SENATE

Dan Sullivan

RepublicanAlaskaCurrently serving

Sworn into the Senate on Source ↗

What they said 13

Their stated policy positions and commitments, with quotes and links to the original sources.

All statements (13)Campaign (2)In office (11)
While serving · Original date not established
Energy & environmentEconomy, taxes & workForeign affairs & defense

Promote Alaska LNG as a national energy project

AI-assisted summary

Sullivan supports making the case for Alaska LNG as a project with benefits for Alaska and the United States. He said it could support jobs, provide lower-cost energy to Alaskans and potentially Hawaiians, supply U.S. allies in Asia, improve the trade deficit, and strengthen national security. He also cited the possibility of sending gas to Ukraine to reduce its exposure to Russian energy pressure.

Context: Sullivan described these as potential benefits; the interview does not specify a federal implementation plan.

While serving · Original date not established
Energy & environment

Expedite permitting for the Alaska gas line

AI-assisted summary

Sullivan supports speeding up permitting and regulatory reviews for the Alaska gas line without weakening environmental protections. He said cutting one to three years from the usual permitting timeline could save hundreds of millions or billions of dollars and make the project more competitive. He pointed to previously reviewed areas along parts of the proposed route as a reason faster review might be possible.

Context: He described the timeline reduction and savings as a possibility, not a guaranteed result. He noted that the gas line would not follow previously reviewed routes for its entire length.

While serving · Original date not established
Government & elections

Require congressional approval of major federal rules

AI-assisted summary

Sullivan supports legislation requiring federal agencies to send major rules to Congress for an up-or-down approval vote. He argues this would prevent agencies from imposing rules that Congress has not approved after similar proposals fail to advance through the legislative process.

Context: The interview does not define what counts as a major rule or specify the legislation’s procedures.