Martin argued he was handicapped and required exception to use a cart in USGA tournaments. He can't have it both ways, so he rides a scooter that is provided for the handicap and elderly or he walks, quite simple, fair and logical.
I think the USGA rule is absurd. There is a "cripple" or "oldster" stigma attached to using a scooter cart. I understand completely why Martin was upset about first having the circumstances changed on him for no apparently logical reason and secondly, being offered an unsatisfactory alternative. The USGA was being "fair" in the same way that Jim Crow laws were fair - "Hey, we aren't picking on any particular person of color - they ALL get the same back of the bus seats, separate water fountains, and segregated schools." I don't imagine there's any great amount of space being saved by a single scooter versus golf cart - I don't recall seeing any mobility-challenged fans on their own transportation at the two pro tournaments I've attended (I saw a few larger 6-person carts ferrying older people around, but I wasn't particularly paying attention), let alone scores of them stacked up around the tees or greens taking up valuable spectator space, so I don't see a problem with having a few carts per hole versus a few scooters. Is there any rationale behind a scooter versus cart rule, other than to save space? I can't think of one. I think that the USGA can reasonably accommodate a handicapped person without embarassing him/her. But here I am again making points that some of the people on this site despise because I'm one of those damn pinko-types who has this crazy idea that rules (and people too) should be .... gasp ..... fair, logical, and reasonable.