Alaska Policy Commentary  ·  July 8, 2026

Sen. Sullivan Introduced Legislation Against BlackRock While Holding a BlackRock Fund — And His Anti-ESG Bill Actually Made That Investment More Valuable

Senator Dan Sullivan has made up to $2 million in stock trades while in office, his net worth has grown 176% since 2015, and he holds a BlackRock mutual fund worth up to $250,000 — while introducing federal legislation targeting BlackRock's proxy voting power. The conflict is more sophisticated than it appears. His anti-BlackRock bill benefits his BlackRock holding. And it protects the family company that is his largest personal asset.

By Tom Lamb  ·  Alaska Policy Series  ·  July 8, 2026

Sen. Dan Sullivan introduced the Investor Democracy Is Expected Act — known as the INDEX Act — to limit the proxy voting power of BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street. He co-sponsored it with Sen. Marco Rubio. He championed it as consumer protection, shareholder democracy, and a check on Wall Street's outsized influence over corporate America. He told the Washington Examiner it would ensure that "the beneficial owner who owns the shares is the entity or person entitled to vote — not the managers of these massive passive index funds."

What Sullivan did not disclose in that interview — and what has received no scrutiny in Alaska's 2026 Senate race — is that Sullivan himself holds a BlackRock Global Allocation mutual fund worth between $100,001 and $250,000. He is legislating against a firm in which he is invested. And the legislation he introduced, properly understood, does not hurt his BlackRock investment. It makes it more valuable.

That is not a simple conflict of interest. It is a sophisticated one — and it connects directly to Sullivan's largest personal holding, the family petroleum chemicals company whose stock he trades while sitting on the Senate committee with oversight over chemical safety.

"Sullivan introduced anti-BlackRock legislation while holding a BlackRock fund. BlackRock told him it didn't oppose the bill. There's a reason for that — his legislation makes BlackRock more valuable, not less."

The Sullivan Financial Picture — What the Disclosures Show

Between 2015 and 2024, Sullivan reported nearly 80 stock trades worth between $550,000 and $2.08 million — according to Quiver Quantitative, which tracks congressional stock trading. He was the only federal politician from Alaska to report any stock transactions in this period. His net worth has increased by 176% since joining the Senate, from approximately $3 million to $8.29 million.

Sullivan's Key Financial Holdings and Transactions

RPM International (NYSE: RPM): $1–5 million stake. RPM is a $6.7 billion multinational petroleum chemicals company founded by Sullivan's grandfather, now run by his brother Frank Sullivan. Sullivan's "favorite stock for trading" per Sludge. Made multiple sales pocketing up to $300,000. RPM's PAC has given Sullivan $15,000; its employees have given $137,775 — among his top donors.

BlackRock Global Allocation Fund (MALOX): $100,001–$250,000. A BlackRock-managed mutual fund with significant exposure to energy, industrials, and global equities — including fossil fuel companies. Held while introducing federal legislation targeting BlackRock's proxy voting power.

STOCK Act violations: Disclosed sale of Mowi (salmon company) stock 93 days late and Five Below stock 65 days late — both past the 45-day congressional deadline. Sullivan's office said he was unaware of the sales until late October because a third-party manager handled them.

RPM sold while on chemical safety subcommittee: Sullivan sold up to $50,000 in RPM International shares while serving on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee's subcommittee focused on chemical safety. RPM manufactures chemical sealants and products used in fossil fuel extraction — directly in that subcommittee's oversight jurisdiction. The New York Times included Sullivan in its September report on lawmakers trading stocks in companies their committees oversee.

Total trades 2015–2024: Nearly 80 transactions, $550,000–$2.08 million. Net worth growth: 176%. He is the only Alaska federal politician to report any stock transactions in this period.

The INDEX Act — What It Actually Does to BlackRock's Business

The INDEX Act would require managers of passive index funds and ETFs to vote proxies based on the wishes of individual investors, rather than using the fund manager's discretion. Sullivan framed this as democratizing shareholder power. What he did not explain is what it means for BlackRock's business model — and why BlackRock told him it didn't oppose the legislation.

When Sullivan told the Washington Examiner that BlackRock had "surprisingly" not pushed back against the bill, and that some firms had "even indicated they support" it, he was revealing something important. BlackRock's lack of opposition was not surprising to anyone who understands the economics. Pass-through voting does several things that benefit BlackRock as a business:

How the INDEX Act Benefits BlackRock — And Sullivan's Holdings

Reduces BlackRock's ESG liability: BlackRock has faced years of political pressure and state divestment campaigns over its ESG proxy voting. If the INDEX Act passes, BlackRock can tell Republican states: "We're just executing your votes." It becomes a neutral infrastructure provider rather than an ESG activist. The political pressure evaporates. Republican state pension funds — which have been withdrawing billions — return as clients. BlackRock's assets under management grow. Sullivan's fund value increases.

Cements BlackRock's first-mover advantage: BlackRock had already voluntarily launched its "Voting Choice" program, giving $1.8 trillion in eligible assets the option to vote their own proxies. The INDEX Act mandates what BlackRock was already offering — cementing its competitive advantage over rivals who hadn't yet built the infrastructure. Competitors face new compliance costs; BlackRock doesn't.

Reduces ESG proxy pressure on fossil fuel companies: When BlackRock is prevented from voting ESG resolutions at fossil fuel companies, those companies face less shareholder pressure to price in climate risk or reduce production. Their stock value is supported. The BlackRock Global Allocation fund Sullivan holds contains fossil fuel company positions. Those positions benefit directly from reduced ESG proxy pressure.

Protects RPM International directly: RPM International — Sullivan's $1–5 million family holding — is a petroleum chemicals company targeted by exactly the type of ESG proxy campaigns Sullivan's legislation neuters. Environmental and chemical safety resolutions at RPM's annual meetings are precisely the kind of votes BlackRock and other large managers cast. The INDEX Act reduces proxy voting pressure on RPM. Sullivan's largest personal asset is protected by his own legislation.

The result is a legislative strategy that benefits every financial interest Sullivan holds simultaneously. His BlackRock fund increases in value as BlackRock sheds ESG liability and wins back conservative institutional clients. His RPM International holding is protected from the ESG proxy campaigns his legislation neuters. And the fossil fuel companies whose stock appears in his BlackRock fund face less activist shareholder pressure on climate risk.

This is not what Sullivan described when he introduced the INDEX Act. He described it as consumer protection. The financial beneficiaries are himself, his family company, and the fossil fuel industry whose interests he has championed throughout his Senate career.

RPM International — The Family Company at the Center

RPM International deserves separate scrutiny because it sits at the intersection of Sullivan's financial interests, his committee assignments, and his legislative priorities in a way that has received almost no public attention in Alaska.

RPM International was founded by Sullivan's grandfather. It is now run by his brother Frank Sullivan as CEO, with another brother serving as a senior vice president. Dan Sullivan owns between $1 million and $5 million in RPM stock — his largest single disclosed asset. RPM's PAC and employees are among his top campaign donors — $15,000 from the PAC and $137,775 from employees since 2015.

RPM International makes chemical sealants, coatings, and specialty materials — multiple product lines designed specifically for use in fossil fuel extraction, pipeline construction, and shipping infrastructure. It is the type of company that benefits when fossil fuel infrastructure expands. It is the type of company targeted by ESG proxy campaigns on chemical safety and environmental impact. And it is in the direct oversight jurisdiction of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee's subcommittee on chemical safety — the subcommittee Sullivan sits on.

The New York Times reported in September 2021 that Sullivan sold up to $50,000 in RPM shares while simultaneously sitting on the chemical safety subcommittee. Sullivan was one of 97 members of Congress trading stocks in companies their committees oversee — identified in the Times' investigation as a systemic conflict of interest. He was the only Alaska federal legislator in that report.

"Sullivan sold family company stock while sitting on the committee that oversees that company's industry. He introduced legislation that protects that company from ESG shareholder pressure. That company's PAC and employees are among his top donors. This is not a coincidence."

The STOCK Act Violations — Delayed Transparency

The STOCK Act requires members of Congress to disclose stock trades within 45 days of the transaction date. Its purpose is to prevent insider trading and ensure the public can monitor whether lawmakers are trading on non-public information obtained through their committee work.

Sullivan violated this deadline at least twice. He disclosed the sale of Mowi (a Norwegian salmon company) stock 93 days after the transaction — more than double the legal limit. He disclosed the sale of Five Below stock 65 days after the transaction — almost two weeks past the deadline. The combined value of the late-disclosed trades was between $16,000 and $65,000.

Sullivan's office said he was unaware of the sales because a third-party investment manager handled them and did not notify Sullivan until October 30. Liz Hempowicz of the Project on Government Oversight said that reporting disclosures late "delays transparency" with the public — making it harder to determine whether trades were made on the basis of non-public information available to Sullivan through his committee work.

Sullivan is not the only lawmaker to have violated the STOCK Act. Business Insider identified 75 members of Congress who appear to have done so since 2021. But Sullivan's late disclosures come in the context of a trading pattern — nearly 80 trades over nine years, a 176% net worth increase, trades in a family company under his committee's jurisdiction — that together raise questions no individual late filing explains away.

The 2026 Senate Race — What Alaskans Should Know

Mary Peltola — the only Democrat to win a statewide Alaska race since 2008, running against Sullivan for his Senate seat — has said she supports banning congressional stock trading entirely. She told Alaska Public Media that it "contributes to corruption" and she was surprised stronger safeguards were not already in place.

Sullivan opposes such a ban. His campaign has not addressed the specific conflicts identified in this post — the INDEX Act introduced while holding a BlackRock fund, the RPM trades while sitting on the chemical safety subcommittee, or the structural benefit his anti-ESG legislation provides to his family company.

These are not partisan accusations. They are documented transactions, disclosed by Sullivan himself under the STOCK Act and Senate financial disclosure requirements. The question they raise is simple: when a senator introduces legislation targeting a company he holds stock in, trades stock in a company his committee oversees, and champions policies that benefit his family's business — is he serving Alaska's interests or his own?

Alaska's August 18 primary is the moment to ask. Alaskans deserve a complete picture of who their senator is — not just his committee assignments and floor speeches, but the financial interests those assignments and speeches protect. The disclosures are public. The pattern is documented. The question is whether anyone is paying attention.

Tom Lamb  ·  July 8, 2026  ·  Alaska Policy Series  ·  thomasalamb.blogspot.com

Sources: Quiver Quantitative congressional stock tracker, Senate STOCK Act financial disclosures, New York Times "Lawmakers Traded Stocks" investigation September 2021, Alaska Current April 2026, Washington Examiner, E&E News, Globe and Mail, Sludge, Alaska Democrats press release, Alaska Fish News. This post discusses documented public disclosures in the context of public policy analysis. It is not legal advice and makes no allegation of criminal conduct.