The living wage movement swept American cities in the mid-1990s, bringing new attention to working poverty and challenging the economic development ethos of urban regimes. This case study of the living wage in Philadelphia merges regime theory and social movement theory to explain the outcomes of two very different campaigns in 1997-1999 and 2005. Documents from the two efforts were examined and interviews were conducted with a variety of actors in social movement organizations, an instrumental union, and from within the regime. Socioeconomic conditions created fertile ground for economic justice advocates and constrained the actions of the regime, but did not predict adoption or defeat of a living wage bill. A social movement analysis of the earlier living wage coalition explains, in part, why it lacked capacity to challenge the regime and prevail, although a similar level of mobilization was adequate in other cities with Democratic regimes. Regime theory provides insights into why the governing coalition mounted opposition in 1998, yet allowed an ostensibly similar bill to pass in 2005. By 2005 social movement organizations were operating on a different geographic scale, and had adopted new strategies that allowed them to use a weak living wage bill (and to be used in turn by a regime politician) as a means to an end, which was to impact working poverty statewide. There has been inadequate enforcement of a policy passed from within city council, without involvement of direct stakeholders.