One more thing I would like to add. Why does everyone feel USBC and bowling would be better with more bowlers/members? Do more USBC members equal a better organization?
USBC has a set cost each year to perform the bare minimum according to their mission statement. Any additional funds are used to fuel the future goals of the organization. Right now, USBC wants to fuel the future of bowling as a sport. Notice this isn't the future of league bowling or the future of more members. Pushing bowling the sport into the same realm of respect and reverence of other sports requires a different view compared to the past. It requires a different approach.
Perhaps the magic number of members is less than one million, or it could be 10 million. If charging 500,000 members $50/yr gets them to the where they want to be, then that's what it takes. It doesn't mean you can't go bowl. It doesn't mean you can't bowl leagues and tournaments. You don't have to pay the $50. You can continue to live in your non-sanctioned world and enjoy your life.
Also, as stated earlier, today's association boards are not the best representations of the USBC's mission. Part of the reason is people work, have kids and have other interests. Doesn't mean they don't care about bowling, but at the same time they don't want to devote several hours working on the issues. Because of this, the boards are dominated by retirees who are vocal and claim their experience means they know what's best. I do agree they USBC needs to educate their boards and members to present the USBC better. If there is one thing I am extremely critical of it is local association image, and at this time, it is below substandard.