Charter laws have been the reform debate's path of least resistance. But the combination of regulatory barriers, open admissions, lack of consumer sovereignty, preferential funding of traditional public schools, and political control of prices means that charter laws may be irrelevant as reform catalysts, or worse. Even the strongest charter laws may offer a tempting, but ultimately unproductive, avenue of system change. Some critics argue that a charter option will expand the public sector, but not improve it much, and decimate the tiny, frail private sector. This article examines what charter laws have in common-concerns about "strong" charter laws. (Contains 1 figure.)