I need to read the actual bill closer but I would want political campaigns, charities, and PACs, subject to it as well. It is depressing how many "protection" bills exclude political committees and related PACs.
[1] https://iapp.org/news/a/top-five-operational-impacts-of-cacp...
It's an important distinction because Facebook and Google don't really sell your data per se, they sell you a service that does heuristic targeting for you based on their data. A small component of that product lets you use some shared data to track things like conversions, but that's not core of the objection to how Facebook does advertising.
That's because they're quasi-government entities or related, and above the fray.
No, they’re not. If anything, the distinction should be more clear for these entities than other private businesses who could at least be contracted by the government. Political campaigns are entirely private marketing arrangements. The extent to which they are “quasi-government” should be perfectly obvious in light of their intentions, which is to become elected in the future. Even if the candidate is serving in office, that office’s duties and the campaign they run are separate projects. There is no blurry line here.