If one were to travel the country talking to golf association administrators and the volunteer leadership of golf associatins, he would find that they all, universally, feel about their association the way TP and other contributors to this thread feel about their own associations. Rather than debate which are the "best" associations, it is more productive to think about each association as a link in a chain of organizations that are preserving the game as best as they can for the future benefit of all golf. As a former golf administrator, I can avow with great confidence that happenings and decisions made in one association often affect similar situations in other associations. While larger associations such as the MET do wield influence, an idea from the Wyoming GA may carry just as much weight in some circumstances.
Without ranking them, in my opinion the "heavyweights" in golf administration are the MetGA, the Chicago District GA, the Northern and Southern CA GAs, the Georgia GA, the Pacific Northwest GA, the Massachusetts GA, the Carolinas GA, the Florida GA, and the Arizona GA. There would not be much debate as to why these associations carry such weight- the prevelance of historical golf participation and influential clubs, and large numbers of active golfers. However, my personal experience is that every golf association has a history of dedicated service to the game. As large associations, they also attract and keep (i.e., can pay) top administrative talent.