First, the Los Angeles Times reports that the Barack Obama campaign says it won't pass out street cash for primary day, and Philadelphia ward leaders warn that their foot soldiers could defect to Hillary Rodham Clinton. The story is picked up nationwide.

Then the Clinton people say they, too, aren't reaching into their wallets. To every reporter who will listen, and there are many, ward leaders and committee people use this as an occasion to ask for money. They're not dumb.

But I'm confused. This is a presidential primary. When have there ever been wheelbarrows of street money to get out the vote for a presidential primary? The national media were looking for another of those Throwing Snowballs at Santa stories. And in the process, Philadelphia pols managed to get their pictures taken sticking their hands out.

I needed to know what to think. So I called a local expert for guidance.

Carol Ann Campbell is a West Philadelphia ward leader. She's secretary of the Democratic City Committee, a former city councilwoman, a superdelegate. She's also a legacy, having grown up watching her father, Edgar C. Campbell, once called the Dean of Black Philadelphia Pols, inform the electorate at the polling place.

"I find this despicable," she said by phone the other day.

What, the lack of folding money?

No, the attention she and other Philadelphia politicians are getting for a time-honored local custom.

"We are a machine town and all this [coverage] puts an ominous thing over it, like it's something dirty." Walking-around money, she insisted, isn't dirty; it's about feeding the hungry.

"The committee people and the ward leaders have to buy lunch for hundreds of people, otherwise they won't have good workers. They have to buy coffee, orange juice and doughnuts. That's just the way it is."

Listen closely, and you hear the squeaky machine calling for the oil can.

It would take a good $400,000 to $500,000 to properly arm the 14,000 people the machine can put on the street, she says.

She went on, letting me in on "how it really works." A lot of people who turn out to vote do so thinking they're paying back local pols for taking care of their problems. So they need direction. In this primary, "you have a lot of people who are undecided, who worry about the lack of experience on both sides. The committee people make the difference in talking to people about these issues."

She pointed out that foot soldiers give up a good day's wages to get out the vote. She said she hasn't asked for money. She wouldn't. But what a little cash could do . . .

"This is a bad situation, because you're trying to get the maximum [vote]. It's not about winning; it's about how much you win by."

Then she let me in on a fact of political life. The Obama people are asking for names of people they can pay to canvass for the candidate. "Any way you look at it, they are paying people." So no street money, but a little canvassing money.

If there are no wheelbarrows of walking-around money this time of year, why the stories?

Zack Stalberg, CEO of the Committee of Seventy, answered that one: "I happen to view the stories and the quotes as blatant advertisements for people to be paid."

What's also happening, he said, is that out-of-town media expect dirty tricks here. "They are happy to have finally arrived in Philadelphia, where they feel like they might find some nasty old practices they couldn't find in places like Iowa or New Hampshire."

Not that Philly elections are clean, he said. "Candidates drive around with tens of thousands of dollars in the trunks of their cars, but that is for a local race."

The good news in all of this, he said, is that the two Democratic candidates realize street money is not a good investment now. "At least it shows they have a fundamental sense of economics."