By Josh DeLuca

In the never-ending chess match that is our current political environment, political actors have two modes: the pursuit of power and the exercise of power. While being in power is the ultimate goal, in many senses, the pursuit of power is significantly easier. For those with political clout, expectations are high, and voters count on them to deliver tangible results; tolerance for excuses is understandably low.

Right now, the Democratic Party finds itself in this desired, but demanding position of governing. Having delivered Democrats the White House and control of both chambers of Congress, voters rightly expect results. To be fair, Democrats already have one concrete victory in their column: passage of the American Rescue Plan, President Biden’s COVID-19 stimulus package. Though the importance of the stimulus should not be downplayed, holding it up as the sole legislative accomplishment of Democratic control and the Biden presidency will hardly suffice. Voters expect more. Democrats know this. President Biden knows this.

Thus, for more than six months, congressional Democrats and Biden have expended a lot of time, energy, and political capital in trying to pass an infrastructure package. In theory, this should not be a huge lift: not only do Democrats control both chambers of Congress, but many Republicans have indicated in the past that they support infrastructure spending. However, passing major congressional legislation is never this simple. Indeed, Democrats face two major challenges moving forward.

The first challenge that Democrats must navigate is the tenuous nature of their legislative majorities. In the House, while Democrats hold the majority, Speaker Pelosi can only afford to lose seven members in any potential party-line vote. In the Senate, the situation is even tighter. Because the chamber is split evenly between Democrats and Republicans, all 50 Senate Democrats must vote in favor of a bill in order for it to advance along party lines, with Vice President Harris breaking the tie. These narrow margins are exacerbated by the fact that the Democratic caucuses are far from monolithic groups. Indeed, Democrats in Congress range from self-proclaimed Democratic Socialists to a conservative Senator from ruby-red West Virginia, a state that voted overwhelmingly for Donald Trump. While they’re all nominally members of the same party, getting these divergent politicians to agree on a unified piece of legislation is far from an easy task.

Okay, but you said that Republicans also supported infrastructure, you may be thinking. Can’t they pass a bipartisan bill? Herein lies the second huge obstacle Democrats face: Democrats and Republicans define infrastructure differently. Republicans support infrastructure in the way it has traditionally been defined: building and fixing roads, bridges, airports, and other physical improvements. Democrats, too, support this “hard” infrastructure, but have adopted a more expansive definition. Democrats’ “soft” infrastructure would include a wide expansion of the social safety net to fund measures like universal Pre-K, paid family leave, and expanded child tax credit. Needless to say, Republicans are not on board with these social programs.

Given these complicated dynamics, Democratic leaders in Congress have proceeded on a “two-track” path, seeking both a bipartisan “hard” infrastructure bill and a Democrats-only soft infrastructure bill. After months of negotiations, in August, the Senate passed a $1 trillion “hard” infrastructure bill in a bipartisan fashion with a remarkable 19 Republicans joining all 50 Democrats. In the weeks since, Democrats have been working to come to an agreement amongst themselves on the size and contents of their “soft” infrastructure bill. Here is where Democrats find themselves engaged in a high-stakes game of chicken. Conservative Democratic Senators, whose votes are necessary for passage, have complained that the proposed $3.5 trillion in soft infrastructure spending is too steep of a price tag. Citing concerns over inflation and the national debt, they believe Congress should try to minimize expenditures, likely fearing political blowback from fiscally conservative constituents. Meanwhile, progressive Democrats in the House, who have championed many of the social programs included in the “soft” bill, feel that $3.5 trillion is already a compromise. Thus, they have maintained that they won’t vote for the “hard” infrastructure bill unless their “soft” bill passes the Senate. In support of these progressive members, Pelosi will not bring the “hard” bill up for a vote until the “soft” bill passes the Senate.

So, where does this leave us? Well, if both sides of the Democratic Party-conservative Senators and progressive House members-stick to their guns, both the “hard” and “soft” infrastructure bills could go up in flames. If Democrats cannot unite and come to an agreement, infrastructure will not pass and a major portion of the Biden agenda will go unfulfilled. Not only would the American people be deprived of these bills’ substantive benefits, but it would be an embarrassing referendum on Democrats’ ability to govern. Democrats cannot afford this. President Biden cannot afford this.

Undoubtedly, in the weeks to come, key Congressional Democrats will continue posturing on cable television and in the op-Ed pages. However, at the end of the day, coming up empty is not a politically viable option. Democrats should be reminded of the fate suffered by their Republican colleagues in 2017. After years of campaigning to repeal and replace Obamacare, Republicans finally had their chance: with Donald Trump in the White House and control of both chambers of Congress, the Republicans were poised to make change. And yet, despite unified control of government and years of campaigning, party infighting caused their repeal and replace efforts to fail. After that embarrassment, Republicans lost face with voters. If Democrats’ infrastructure efforts suffer a similar fate, Democrats’ credibility on the campaign trail would take a serious hit. When you’re in power, voters expect results.

Not only must Democrats pass this legislation, but they must do so quickly. Democratic Senator Joe Manchin recently said that there wasn’t an “urgency” to pass the infrastructure bills. With all due respect to Senator Manchin, he is incorrect. While Democrats control Congress today, they will not indefinitely. In fact, if history tells us anything, it is highly likely that Democrats will lose at least their majority in the House, if not the Senate as well, in the 2022 midterm elections. Indeed, since 1934, the party that controlled the White House has lost House seats in all but three midterm elections. This is a lesson that President Biden knows well. After two years of unified Democratic control at the beginning of the Obama Administration, Obama lost the Democratic House majority in 2010, and never regained it for the remainder of his six years in office.

If Democrats want to make their mark and deliver President Biden a signature legislative achievement, now is the time. Yes, there are significant differences in opinion between various members of the Democratic caucus. However, if some House or Senate Democrats think that the political costs of passing this legislation are too great, the costs of coming up empty are even greater. Democrats have spent too much precious time and political capital only to fall short. For the good of the Democratic Party, President Biden, and the American people, Democrats on Capitol Hill must unite to exercise their power, demonstrate their ability to govern, and pass the infrastructure bills. Democrats must get it done. President Biden must get it done.