The golden democratic tradition
  of an informed and involved electorate freely and rationally choosing its public
  officials seems to be at odds with American political reality. Thus the questions:
  On what basis do people vote and form opinions? How does the lack of information
  at the individual level affect system performance? In this collection twenty-six
  distinguished political scientists discuss, debate, and define the relationship
  between information and the democracy it supposedly serves. The contributors
  address both the empirical and normative aspects of governing in the United
  States, employing psychological, sociological, and economic perspectives.
 

“Imagination may be thought of as a ‘work-around.’ It is a resourceful tactic to ‘undo’ a rule by creating a path around it without necessarily defying it. . . . Transgression, on the other hand, is rule breaking. There is no pretense of reinterpretation; it is defiance pure and simple. Whether imagination or disobedience is the source, constraints need not constrain, ties need not bind.”
           
So writes Kenneth A. Shepsle in his introduction to Rule Breaking and Political Imagination. Institutions are thought to channel the choices of individual actors. But what about when they do not? Throughout history, leaders and politicians have used imagination and transgression to break with constraints upon their agency. Shepsle ranges from ancient Rome to the United States Senate, and from Lyndon B. Johnson to the British House of Commons. He also explores rule breaking in less formal contexts, such as vigilantism in the Old West and the CIA’s actions in the wake of 9/11. Entertaining and thought-provoking, Rule Breaking and Political Imagination will prompt a reassessment of the nature of institutions and remind us of the critical role of political mavericks.