Yes, it's distinct. FinCen is only about money laundering. Money transfer licensing is about the money transfer firm not stealing your money. California is particularly strict about this, because so many people in California are sending money home to Mexico, and there have been some bad actors.
If any of these Bitcoin operators were serious, they'd register with the SEC as broker/dealers and as exchanges. That covers the whole US; no need to deal with individual states. Every stock broker does this. Customers then get investor protection - SIPC insurance up to $500,000 if the broker goes bust. That works quite well. Even Madoff's investors got everything back up to $500K, and slowly, the SIPC has clawed money back from the "winners" of Madoff's Ponzi, Overall, Madoff investors now have about 50% of their money back. Investor protection doesn't mean you can't lose money through investment risk, but it means that you're protected from theft by the broker, for both cash and securities held by the broker.
So why don't Bitcoin startups do that?
1) The broker has to pass background checks (Roger Ver has a criminal conviction and would fail.)
2) There are financial strength requirements (if you're handling millions of other people's money, you need to have a few yourself).
3) There are detailed accounting, audit, and reporting requirements.
4) FINRA can fine brokers for violating the rules for brokers. About once a day, FINRA takes disciplinary action against some broker.
5) There are exams to work in a brokerage. Individual brokers must pass the FINRA Series 7 set of exams. There are exams for top management, for inside auditors, and even for customer service reps. (Customer service reps have to know what they are and are not allowed to do.)
6) Segregation of customer funds from brokerage funds is required. (MF Global didn't do that and went bust. The case against their CEO is still in discovery and he may yet go to jail.)
Until Bitcoin startups start doing this, it's still amateur hour.