But then reading these pieces in further detail, we reach these buried statements:

1. Privacy Act of 2001
— begin quote —
Bill recognizes the legitimate needs of business:

However, to reflect the legitimate needs of business, the Privacy Act of 2001 proposes a lower threshold for the sale of less sensitive information such as a person’s name and address.

Under this lower threshold, businesses must give NOTICE of their intent to use this information. After giving notice, the business can sell this less sensitive data unless an individual tells them not to do so.
— end quote —

2. Privacy Act of 2003
— begin quote —
* Prohibit the sale or display of Americans’ Social Security numbers to the public, but would allow businesses to share these numbers with other businesses and government entities.
— end quote —

— begin quote —
* Permits businesses to share financial information with their affiliates or joint venture partners, unless a customer objects (opt-out).
— end quote —

Note that in all these quotes, Feinstein clearly bends over backwards in maximizing questionable use of privacy information for businesses at the risk of the loss of control of such privacy for the individuals to which this information directly concerns. Instead of individuals having any chance to opt-in to control of their info, they are limited in these examples by a default decision solely to opt-out.

Feinstein has mandated a disingenuous sleight-of-hand here in foisting more limited opt-out control of private information away from individuals and potential consumers.
Her wresting out of such privacy controls for individuals and hand-delivering them to both responsible and IRRESPONSIBLE businesses thus strongly belittles any claims she has that she is just “looking out” for the best interests of all parties concerned including we “Main Streeters”.
This is certainly consistent with jimbyrd’s depiction of the senior Senator here.