Waxman was smart about the campaign for it.  While Dingell was busy holding press conferences, Waxman was keeping his mouth shut and lining up votes behind the scenes.  The Hill staffers say he had Pelosi's backing, and I suspect there was some arm-twisting from the Obama camp, given that Waxman's agenda lines up more than Dingell's with Obama's platform and the fact that one of Waxman's long-time aides is now working for Obama.

The Blue Dogs, who would be the anti-Waxman crowd, didn't do terribly well in the election, especially compared with the Progressives and the New Dems.

On the whole, this is consistent with the movement in the House, which has generally been leftward since the election.  The House also doesn't have issues like the filibuster to deal with, anyway, so it's going to be easier to get things through.

It's the Senate that's almost completely dysfunctional.  But there are a few factors working in our favor there.  We've probably got Arlen Specter's vote on key issues (probably health care, definitely Employee Free Choice), since Pennsylvania went big for Obama and he's in danger of losing his seat in two years (polling at only 40%).  We can also probably squeeze another vote or two out of Maine, and I'm sure there are a couple others.

So there's an annoying but still reasonably clear path to 60, even if things don't come through for Franken and/or Martin.  And the fact that the Republicans are more vulnerable two years from now in the Senate than the Dems should be helpful.

WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!