Imho, I would prefer voluntary Cert. over Licensing. Studies show that
whenever the number of service providers goes down, more people , especially
the disadvantaged, either do without the service or do it themselves.  For
example, when the number of plumbers ( I know its a wierd example but bare
with me) decreases because of licensing laws, retail sales of plumbing parts
go up as people attempt to make their own repairs. Dental Hygiene is poorer
in states with the most restrictive licensing requirments for dentists,
because fewer people can afford regular check ups.  For the same reason, the
incidence of blindness increases in areas with the most stringent licensing
for optometrists.  Accidental electrocutions go up when licensing
requirements for electricians increase.

By limiting availability , licensing laws lower the overall amout of quality
service delivered.  The negative impact of decreasing availability far out
weighs any increase in quality that may occur, as in the studies mentioned
above indicate.

Licensing laws are usually requested, not by consumers complaining about the
quality of service, but by the professionals themselves.  Physicians were one
of the very professions to do this. Setting High standards for those who were
already in the profession and denying approval to practitioners who use
different techniques from theirs. (Remember what physicians did to
Chiropractors? or should I say tried to do?) Choice is diminished and fees
rise accourdingly.

Licensing limits the availablility of service, there by lowering the overall
quality delivered.
Our services are customer driven. Good Lc's, Certified or not, will be
recommended by their clients, while those unabe to help their patients soon
find themselves shunned. We reap as we sow. Clients vote with their dollars.

(This is not intended as a flame to anyone only my two cents worth........)

Diane Barnes