I respectfully think this is a flawed proposal for the following reasons.  

I understand the petitioners argument and often wonder whether we need to regulate who can do work as much as we do.

At the same time college courses do not provide for practical building experience in most cases.  I do think a consideration for structural or civil engineering degrees may be fair, and maybe building construction degrees at a lessor extent.  Passing an open book contractor test alone is just not equal to building experience and being able to understand contracts or accounting isn't either.

Regardless of the trade, contractor license is not really issued to build homes or fix a flip property as an investor; it is issued to be able to build homes on a contract basis for members of the general public, and there is just a higher standard for that.  The same goes for being a trade contractor.  

If you want to build a spec home to sell it you don't need a license to do that you can build as the owner.  But I think if you are going to market yourself as a home builder to the general public it is reasonable to think you have real field time under your belt.

If you want to gain that field time by building or renovating properties on your own account as the owner then I think that's reasonable and people can decide if they like your product or not.  But to learn on a clients dollar just isn't the right way.