Bio not provided
@MattMoore2 The catch here is that being a veteran makes one eligible for treatment at the VAH on a space available basis but it is not a medical plan or insurance. It does not provide coverage for treatment outside of the VA system.
10 months, 1 week ago on Masters Worlds Mechanics in the Pits: Caught in the Tape of License Requirements UPDATED: Rule Book
@MattMoore2 Although I won't disagree with the money grubbing conclusion, you are confusing liability insurance and health or accident insurance. Primarily USAC provides liability coverage which protects race organizers, officials, competitiors, etc. from claims of liability due to negligence. Liability would not cover your medical expenses unless you claimed that they were due to negligence on the part of some covered entitty and even then usually only after litigating it. To cover a medical loss you need heatlh or accident coverage. USAC also provides this but only because the USOC requires that NGBs provide medical coverage for participants during competitions. The USAC accident policy actuially has a low deductible if you have your own health or accident insurance but it has a high deductible if it is primary insurance, i.e. you don't have your own. You got dinged for the high deductable because you did not buy health or accident coverage for yourself. Assuming you are not excluded from purchasing health insurance by a pre-existing condition, you could have bought a high deductible ($10-15,000) policy for a really low price and then your accident would have been covered by USAC's insurance with a low deductible. Alternatively you could have purchases accident insurance, which covers injuries but not illnesses,. This is also inexpensive. Basically, there were easy and cheap ways you could have avoided that loss. I also have to point out that your failure to buy health insurance is one reason why my health insurance costs so much. Thankfully this whole problem will go away in 2014.
10 months, 2 weeks ago on Masters Worlds Mechanics in the Pits: Caught in the Tape of License Requirements UPDATED: Rule Book
This is inaccurate. There is no requirement from the insurance company that a license is required to be covered by the liability insurance. If this were the case then road use authorities and land owners, who are routinely coverred by the insurance, would be require to purchase a license.
Getting riders to Europe is not really OBRA's mandate, although OBRA riders seem to be making it to Europe just fine. OBRA's mandate is bike racing in Oregon. USAC's mandate is international competition. They should use the competitions supported by OBRA to identify talent but they have decided to ignore them. OBRA has paid for riders to go to USCF camps. Your question is really a bit like asking if high school basketball is helping players advance to the NBA. High school basketball does not give money to the NBA but nearly all NBA players competed in high school.
1 year, 11 months ago on USA Cycling Responds: Cyclocross Support and Independent Sanctioning Bodies
no_use_for_a_namecyclocrossNorCal ATRA does not sanction races. ATRA has a liability insurance program that allows velodromes to hold racing. It offeres considerable advantages over other sources of liability insurance. This program is expanding. Most US velodromes purchase insurance through ATRA, even if they hold USAC races. Most of these velodromes hold at least some of their racing without purchasing a sanction from USAC.
1 year, 12 months ago on USA Cycling Pressures OBRA, Independent Organizations and Events
There are several inaccuracies in Sean’s statements:
“UCI exemptions” – Despite Sean’s ascertain “The “exemptions” are meant for gran-fondo-type events, not competitions” the rule specifically states that exemptions can be given for races. USAC could, if it desired, give blanket exemptions for all OBRA events or any other race they wish. In fact, USAC has granted a blanket exemption to both ACA and OBRA in the past. They stopped doing that for reasons that were never communicated to OBRA.
Dual sanctioning – USAC’s intention to cease dual sanction has been communicated to OBRA in writing several times over the past few years. To date they have always backed down from this position. Stating “There has been no discussion with Brad or Kenji on these points” is inaccurate. They have been recipients of these written communications. Although USAC’s insurance company may have concerns OBRA does not. In fact OBRA insurance extends to provide coverage during the USAC portion of dual sanctioned events.
Elite vs. grassroots – I think that the readership can accurately form their own opinion about the merits of the respective organizations in this regard.
Reciprocity – Sean states “that’s evaluated every year and agreements expire 12/31”. I don't believe that USAC has a current reciprocity agreement with any racing organization. The contract that OBRA had with USAC did not have an expiration or reevaluation date attached to it. OBRA has held to the agreement while USAC has unilaterally walked away from it. Several years ago USAC presented OBRA with an initial contract that was extremely biased towards USAC. After considerable negotiation an agreement was worked out both organizations could live with. Several years later OBRA was presented with the initial biased contract again. OBRA indicated that this was not acceptable and that we wished to maintain the current contract. OBRA has continued to follow this contract but USAC has stepped away by not following the terms of the contract.
1 year, 12 months ago on USA Cycling Responds: Cyclocross Support and Independent Sanctioning Bodies
JonMaulethesteevo Pros can only ride races that are "recognized" by the NGB, which in the US is USAC. If the race is independently run USAC can elect to recognize it or not. Actually they could elect to blanket recognize OBRA races and have done so in the past. This stuff is all classic cutting off your nose to spite your face.