While Bitcoin and Solana actively build policy advocacy organizations in Washington D.C., Ethereum – the world's second-largest blockchain – has chosen a different path: No need to show off, still dominating the center of policy discussions about crypto. So, is Ethereum's silent strategy really effective?
2025 – The year that determines the fate of the crypto industry.
Political observers at #Washington all agree: 2025 will be the most important year in the history of the crypto industry in the U.S. Major bills regarding digital assets are rapidly moving through Congress, regulatory agencies are continuously updating policies, and the White House under President Trump's second term has taken more positive steps towards this industry.
Not missing a golden opportunity, major blockchains like $BTC and $SOL quickly established a clear presence in D.C.:
The Bitcoin Policy Institute officially opened an office in Washington, tripling its staff in just a few months.
The Solana Policy Institute was established by two leading lobbyists to focus on promoting Solana's voice in U.S. politics.
But amidst this vibrancy, the name Ethereum is... absent. No office, no dedicated research institute in D.C., no official lobbying group named $ETH .
Why is Ethereum 'silent'?
Ethereum is the leading platform for decentralized applications (dApp) and smart contracts, playing a central role in many DeFi, NFT, and staking trends. So why do they not directly invest in policy activities?
The response comes from Bill Hughes, the global legal affairs director at Consensys, a software development company for Ethereum:
"We do not need a marketing campaign for our policy work. Others may need it, but Ethereum does not."
Hughes – a former official under Trump – stated that he often works with the White House and SEC to represent Ethereum on strategic issues, such as staking, ETP, and MEV. However, this work does not take the form of 'an organization named Ethereum', but rather dispersed activities across many different groups.
"Ethereum has always been at the center of the conversation."
A typical example is in a recent SEC meeting about staking, where the entire discussion revolved around Ethereum. When a representative for Solana attempted to state that 'Solana also has a different staking method', no one mentioned MEV or any special mechanisms of Solana.
Hughes asserts:
"MEV? If mentioned in policy, it is only mentioned in the context of Ethereum, period."
Regarding financial products such as staking ETP (exchange-traded funds simulating staking returns), he also confirms that Ethereum is always the main subject mentioned in every discussion between Wall Street and regulators.
Ethereum chooses a decentralized path, even in policy advocacy.
Another supporter of Ethereum, Danny Ryan, who led the 'The Merge' process in 2022, also believes that:
"Ethereum is doing well because there are so many representatives. That is true decentralization – not a centralized marketing strategy."
Danny recently joined the Etherealize organization, which helps connect Ethereum with traditional finance. He often goes to Washington to discuss with government agencies, although his main job is still technology development.
Ryan admits that Ethereum sometimes lacks consistency in its image and marketing, but contributions from the community will help address this weakness:
"There is a gap, but we are trying to fill it by building a common voice, in a more coherent and clear way."
Although he was once nominated for the position of executive director of the Ethereum Foundation for his good communication skills and representation, Ryan ultimately did not take on this position. However, he continues to play the role of an 'unofficial ambassador' for the network.
Is Ethereum taking a gamble?
In the context of the policy game becoming more competitive than ever, the lack of a central policy organization for Ethereum may raise questions for some.
Could this be an overly confident strategy, believing that Ethereum is always the center and therefore does not need 'direct lobbying'?
Or is it a way to preserve a decentralized identity, allowing representative voices to come from everywhere, not controlled by a single entity?
Hughes believes that the current strategy is working well. Ryan admits there are gaps, but he believes the community can adapt and fill them.
Connecting with the crypto market and Binance users.
The differences in how major blockchains position themselves in Washington are not only politically strategic, but also directly impact how they are regulated, and in turn, affect the trust of investors, users, and exchanges like Binance.
If upcoming bills prioritize platforms with a 'strong voice' in D.C., Solana or Bitcoin may benefit in the short term. However, Ethereum, with its large ecosystem, popular staking activities on Binance, and financial products related to ETH, is quietly maintaining a central position in all important discussions.
This shows that Binance users are investing in a platform that has a profound influence in policy discussions, even though it is not loud about its image.
Conclusion
Although there is no separate office in D.C., #Ethereum is proving that power comes from natural presence and a large community, not necessarily from a logo hanging in front of a policy building.
However, in the increasingly fierce crypto policy race, will Ethereum's 'quiet yet profound' strategy continue to be effective, or will it need to change to adapt to a new Washington – where clear, direct, and organized voices are becoming increasingly important?
Risk warning: The cryptocurrency market always poses high risks and is not suitable for everyone. The content of this article is for informational purposes only and should not be considered investment advice. Please carefully consider before participating in the market.
