I think that at the patzer level (probably 98% of all USCF members), the actual organization and business aspect of things don't matter a whole lot.
However, if a prominent GM gets screwed over at a tournament (or something similar), things could become rocky.
I just enjoy entering the occasional tourney and seeing where my playing level is at the time. Cash and prizes aren't a reality for me, anyhow, so I play for the fun and challenge :).
The USCF seems to do quite a lot to promote interest in chess for children in grammar school and junior high, but does it do enough to keep high school and college-aged players interested? It seems that many talented, enthusiastic players leave chess at 17 to 20 years of age. Some comeback later in life, but it seems to me that more needs to be done to maintain the interest in chess throughout a lifetime.
Heh, a high school kid is going to do whatever he or she wants to. :P They don’t even listen to their parents; there is no way they are going to be influenced by a chess organization if they don’t want to be.
ghost_of_pushwood
What makes you say that? From my perspective, the USCF is a clearinghouse. Tournament sponsors report the results of their tournament and the USCF updates my rating. For some reason, all the tournaments that I know of in my area are USCF sanctioned, so, I have no choice but to be a USCF member.
If someone were to act independently, would the situation improve? I doubt it.
Note: I spent 40 years dealing with government regulators, so I'm somewhat immune to the USCF's bureaucratic nonsense.
I quit USCF because they refused to delete an obvious political troll thread in their forum. They don't provide a refund when you cancel your membership, but so what. I refuse to pay to share forum space with a political troll.
I thought of the USCF forum as a refuge from politics of any and all kinds. They thought otherwise.
I started this thread when I was an active tournament player, and USCF-sanctioned tournaments were the only game in town. I've gotten older, and traveling (usually 100 miles or more) to tournaments has become burdensome, so I've let my membership expire. Chess.com became the substitute as I can find a game any time of the day and don't have to travel. My opinion of the USCF remains the same. It's an umbrella organization that provides administrative support. When you no longer need its services, you drop your membership.
... It's an umbrella organization that provides administrative support. When you no longer need its services, you drop your membership.
Or keep the membership if you want to support their mission and the cost isn't too high 
They're typical of small non-profit organizations that are heavily dependent on volunteers. They don't generate enough revenue to attract a top tier staff, so being a USCF executive is not going to get ambitious people their next high-paying job. If it weren't for the fact that chess players like to play in tournaments and have ratings, I'm not sure that there would be any reason for the USCF to exist.
I've seen disparaging remarks about the USCF in several posts (principally the costs), and I wonder what people expect from an organization where the membership dues are less than $50 per year.
From my perspective, the dues are not exorbitant, entry fees in local tournaments are about the same as other forms of entertainment (movies, ball games, golf, etc.), and the cost of playing in a major tournament is comparable to spending a weekend in a major city sightseeing.
The organization is not perfect, internal bickering and financial mangement appear to be its major defects, but it does serve its purpose of being an umbrella organization for U.S. chess.