Is there another option? I'd rather not give that sham of an organization another dollar, but there are tournaments I play in that require a USGA handicap.
USGA membership revenue must be in the tank
kchacker I didn't renew my membership with the USGA this year over my displeasure with the 'solo' player rule to have every round witnessed.
I did renew my GHIN through my club which goes through the KANSAS Amateur Golf Assn. and they in turn (I'm guessing) pay a token amount to the USGA and the USGA also owns GHIN. So, I have a USGA sanctioned handicap and I'm still supporting my state association.
This is the same thing I do. I don't pay the USGA anything directly, but they're still getting money from me. As far as I know, there simply is no other choice.
I think the way it works is that golf facilities pay a nominal usage fee to the USGA for use of their handicap service. In turn, the club then charges the golfer a fee to obtain/maintain an official USGA handicap through their club. It's roughly $15-$20 per season here locally. Some clubs, both public and private, will occasionally include a complimentary USGA handicap service for those who join their club.
But just because one might be a USGA member doesn't automatically entitle that person complimentary use of their handicap service. On the flip side, just because you have an official USGA handicap doesn't mean you're a USGA member.
SWMBO and I are done after the last US Open. No more $10 from us. Those idiots got way out in front of their headlights.
PA-PLAYA
Well I didn't read QUITE what you did into Mike's statement but the anchored putter fiasco is where they lost me. And in their never ending quest to protect par in our national Open they get greens that roll 14 on a stimp on greens w/enough slope that incidents like Dustin's happening aren't a possibility but a certainty. Throw all that in along w/Drunky McDrunkerson presiding at awards ceremonies and its hard to take them seriously anymore.
The USGA at times is a total joke!
Case in point,I recently inquired if it's legal/conforming to paint or powdercoat the face of a putter.
After seeing many putters on WRX refinished this way.
I've heard/read where it is legal and other's say it's not.
My response back from the USGA:
"Can you tell me why you want to cover the face of your putter with either paint or powder coating?
Thanks for the information in advance. I appreciate it."
A simple yes or no was all I was looking for! 
The USGA's overall mission differs significantly from the PGA, and this is where the disconnect has always been. The PGA has a much better grasp of the overall health of the game, which obviously hasn't exactly been good for several years now. When they see the governing body making decisions that have every potential to impact overall interest, especially when those decisions are becoming more and more centered around equipment standards based on the most elite professional tour level of the game, the PGA has every reason to be concerned.
When you look at just about every change that the USGA has made over the past decade, they have come as a result of them seeing the challenges of the game from the professional side of things becoming incredibly out of balance. What they've done during this time is treat the symptoms and not the disease.
Back in 2000 (give or take a few years) is when the disease entered the picture, which was the unveiling of the multi-layered golf ball. Although the difference early on wasn't earth shattering, it didn't take too many years after that before the golf ball manufacturers essentially started perfecting the newfound sciences of multi-layer technology. Suddenly even the most average hitters on tour were enjoying longer, straighter drives. When Tiger won the 1997 Masters, Augusta National was played from tournament length of 6925 yards. When Danny Willet won earlier this year, the players played the layout at 7435 yards.
But the USGA didn't react. And there could be underlying reasons for that, for all we know. Maybe a few of these manufacturers were making considerable donations to the USGA coffers? Or maybe they don't want to admit that they goofed early on with not being able to foresee just how much the golf ball would change the game at that level? Who knows. What we do know however is that the USGA has been very hesitant to even discuss regulating the golf ball.
So with the genie safely out of the bottle and the USGA (for whatever reasons) unwilling to recognize this as the biggest issue, they made an attempt to make up for it in other areas. Long before they implemented the anchoring ban, you will recall that they forced all of the equipment manufacturers to change the grooves in the irons and wedges. The USGA extended an olive branch of sorts to the club-level amateur players with allowing them to continue using their old square-groove irons for an extended period, but the next set of irons or wedges they purchased the following year would meet the same exact standards as that of the players playing at the highest level.
To be completely honest, the impact of the groove change has pretty much gone unnoticed at either level. It hasn't added anymore challenge to the game for us weekend hackers, and it sure as hell hasn't forced the longer hitters on tour to throttle back in an effort to avoid the rough. But just the mere thought of forcing amateurs to potentially have to adjust the way they play the game because of the relative ease that the tour pros seem to play theirs?
Bifurcation already exists, just by virtue of the groove rule not officially going into effect until 2024 for amateurs not participating in USGA sanctioned events. The USGA could've easily used that precedent to continue differentiating the two obvious standards that already existed, most notably by not forcing the anchoring ban upon the very people who ultimately support the entire industry.
They didn't, and for them to suddenly act like they care about the average golfers, after they've basically ignored them for the past decade, is laughable.
