Treating the Web As an Archive

An anonymous reader sends a link to a blog post by David Eaves discussing how the ease of finding information on the web affects how we analyze history. "... nothing is different per se — the same old research methods will be used — but what if it is 10 times easier to do, 100 times faster and contains a million times the quantity of information? With the archives of newspapers, blogs and other websites readily available to be searched, the types of research once reserved for only the most diligent and patient might be more broadly accessible." As an example, he points to an almost 10-year-old article detailing the events surrounding the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, which some believe was a significant contributing factor to the current financial crisis.

Comments

Huh

[paazin]

From the article (Nov 1999):

The decision to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 provoked dire warnings from a handful of dissenters that the deregulation of Wall Street would someday wreak havoc on the nation's financial system.

Yep and no one forsaw this financial crisis, indeed.

Re:Huh

[Trepidity]

There's bipartisan blame for that bill, but it was primarily pushed by Republicans.

The act itself was named Gramm-Leach-Bliley after its three Republican drafters and promoters. The first version of the act passed both Houses with mainly Republican support, especially in the Senate. In the House, it passed 343-86, with a 205-16 tally for the Republicans, and 138-70 for the Democrats (counting Sanders as a D for the moment). In the Senate, it passed 54-44, with a 53-0 tally for the Republicans, and a 1-44 tally for the Democrats. Schumer actually voted against that version of the bill (Fritz Hollings was the lone Democrat in favor).

After reconciliation between the House and Senate versions failed, a new version was drafted that gave some concessions to Democrats, mainly in the form of strengthened anti-redlining provisions and strengthened medical and financial privacy regulations. The sweetened bill passed by large margins, though still with the Democrats (now reduced to only a smaller core) being the primary opposition. In the House, 57 still voted no, including 52 Democrats and only 5 Republicans. In the Senate, there were 8 nays, comprised of 7 Democrats and 1 Republican. Clinton (a Democrat) signed the bill.