Both presidential candidates tell us they intend to change “things” when they get to Washington D.C. Neither candidate has told us specifically just what they will change, but that does not seem to cool the ardor of their supporters.

It may be just as well that they don’t outline a list of proposed changes since a president’s capability to make changes is much more limited than the general population believes.

Our government operates as a three cornered system with legislative, judicial and executive branches. Each provides checks and balances for the other two. The president is the “administrator” of the Executive Branch but has no administrative control over the other two branches. Thus the ability of a president to change the government is limited by design. So change cannot be guaranteed no matter what the candidates say.

However, after watching elections for more than half a century, I can assure you that a couple of things are guaranteed. First, during election campaigns we create some very unrealistic expectations for a new president. Second, change is extremely hard to effect in Washington. Even if the president had total control, we have learned what politicians say during a campaign is not always what they do after they are elected. In fact, history tells us the actions of some of our presidents were exactly the opposite of their campaign rhetoric.

In 1916, Woodrow Wilson ran with a slogan that said, “He kept us out of war.” Within a year we were up to our ears in World War I.

The big issue in the 1964 election between Lyndon B. Johnson and Barry Goldwater was Vietnam. Goldwater said we should bomb Hanoi and the supply routes to the south. Johnson said “no.”

Six months after Johnson won we were bombing targets from one end of the country to the other.

Richard Nixon ran on a strong “law and order” platform. He left office just ahead of impeachment hearings after creating a major law and order crisis for the presidency.

Ronald Reagan defeated Jimmy Carter with his promise of reduced federal spending and balanced budgets. The Reagan tax cuts, coupled with expanded cold war spending, generated major unbalanced budgets and the U.S. became the greatest debtor nation in history over the next eight years.

“Change” is certainly the theme of this campaign. Both candidates are telling us that things will change when they get to Washington. I am not, by nature, a skeptic but in this case I could become one. They say they are going to solve immigration, energy, health care, education, terrorism, the war and unemployment, and balance the budget, all at the same time? What am I missing? Has Houdini come back?

Anderson resident Mark Hopkins is the former president of three colleges, including what was then Anderson College. He is a consultant in international higher education.