As a graduate of the University of Baltimore’s Applied Psychology Counseling Psychology MS training program, I oppose the Virginia Counseling Board’s stated objective to restrict licensure to CACREP-program graduates. The University of Baltimore prepares counselors who have a strong counselor identity, as well as an appreciation for psychological science. I wish to retain my eligibility to practice in the state of Virginia as a well-qualified counselor. CACREP restrictions would eliminate my ability to ever move to, work in, and serve the residents of Virginia as a counselor, given that my graduate program is not CACREP accredited (nor is it eligible, based on the faculty’s degrees in clinical and counseling psychology). In addition, I oppose the current regulation restricting supervision of counseling residents to LPCs and LMFTs. This regulation potentially endangers national licensure portability plans, further divides the sister professions of counseling and psychology, and limits options for clinical supervision during counselor residency at a time when consumers need more access to services, not less. Maryland continues to include psychologists, social workers, and psychiatrists as supervisors for Licensed Graduate Professional Counselors (LGPCs; the analogous level of practice to Virginia’s “counseling resident”) and does not discriminate against licensure applicants from Virginia’s programs based on program accreditation, as there are no program accreditation requirements in Maryland for counselor licensure. As a neighboring state, I hope that Virginia will remain open to us as potential licensees, as Maryland remains open to Virginia graduates who meet educational requirements, regardless of program accreditation. As a military retiree who is accostomed to moving for work, Virginia has been part of the plan for.some time now, but this legislation will eliminate that plan for my family.