It happens at this time in every election season. The Democratic organization in Philadelphia begins demanding, pleading. screaming for street money.

James Polk

They hint that unless the campaign of Barack Obama (and, before him, John Kerry,  Al Gore, Bill Clinton. Mike Dukakis, Walter Mondale, Jimmy Carter, George McGovern, Hubert Humphrey, Lyndon Johnson…and so on and so forth back to James K. Polk) it will suffer dire consequences.

People will stay away from the polls in droves. Turnout will sag. The candidate will leave with city with an anemic margin. In turn, he will lose the state - and the presidency.

Lose the presidency, I tell you, all because he begrudged the city’s hardworking, patriotic committee people a measly $100 to $200 each for their efforts on his behalf on Election Day.

What do candidates usually do when presented with this option?  They shell out the street money. The total bill is about $300,000-$500,000.  In national campaigns where millions are spent, it’s a small price to pay. They do it (and my guess is Obama’s campaign will do it) because they do need to win the city by a huge margin and if street money can bolster turnout, so be it.  Call it insurance money.

They know that a lot of the money is wasted. But, as John Wanamaker said about advertising: “Half the money I spend…is wasted; the trouble is I don’t know which half.”

Will Obama’s margin hurt if he refuses to give our street money?  No.

The challenge in this city on Tuesday won’t be rounding up people to vote, it will be how to handle the crush of people who want to vote.  This city’s voters are revved about this election and I expect them to turn out in record numbers.

Will some of the money be wasted?  Yes.

Street money is usually handed out as cash. It passes through other hands before it reaches committee people.  There sometimes some, um,  spillage before it gets to it’s destination.  A few years ago, a state jury looked at street money in a election for local judges and found that hundreds of thousands of it went unaccounted for. It just, sort of, disappeared. Shenanigans involving ward leaders soaking candidates - sometimes competing candidates - are a rich part of the street money lore.

Are committee people effective at swaying votes? No.

At least not in a high visibility election like President.  No committee person is going to convince a McCain voter to switch to Obama and vice versus.  My rule is: the influence of committee people on voter behavior is in direct proportion to the visibility of the race.

In a race for President, their influence is zero. In a race for local judge, where no one knows who the heck is running, their influence can be considerable.

Should Obama give the street money to the Democratic organization? Yes.

Committee people - the good ones, at least - are more effective than green volunteers.  They know their neighborhoods and its voter.  They know that Mrs. Migatz will need a ride to the polls.  That the ailing Mr. Brown will need to apply for an absentee ballot. That Mr. Sarducci is a McCain backer, so don’t call him to remind him to vote.

On Election Day, many work from 7 a.m. until 9 p.m. manning the polls and rounding up voters. They are the foot soldiers in an old-fashioned party organization that is a vestige of the 19th Century.  But, heck, it is still here and still functioning in its own clanky way.

For a 12-hour day, a $100 payment amount to $8 an hour. Is that an outrageous rate?

It would be sweet if they would volunteer their services to help the party.  But, let us get real.  The day-in-day out work of the party organization cannot be sustained by volunteers alone.  They will come and go, depending on the candidate. The committee people are the permanent base of workers.

There used to be a time when committee people were a necessity. Now, they are not. Now, television, direct mail and robocalls suck up all the money (Obama’s nationally televised infomercial last night cost $100,000 per minute.)

Can you say the change from labor-intensive, organization-based campaigns to capital-intensive, media-driven campaigns has elevated our politics?  Hardly.

By handing out street money Obama gives a slight bow to the past. And that is not a bad thing.