A non-partisan canary in the coal mine?

From Public supports both early voting and requiring photo ID to vote, a survey from Monmouth University.  

The results remind me of an example of how wide the gap can be between the governed and those who govern.  In Britain in the 1970's and 1980s, it was common for there to be a gap of 20-40 points between MP support for the death penalty and the public support for the death penalty.  Regardless of party, the public were by far more enthusiastic for the death penalty for violent crimes than were MPs.

Again, regardless of party.

Which raises an intriguing question - under what governance model is it appropriate for political leadership to operate unconstrained by the sentiments of the public?  There are some good arguments for just such an outcome, especially in countries without the republican tradition of America where political authority is dependent on both citizen voting and generally alignment between the views of the citizenry and those of their representatives.

Nobody wants the tyranny and unpredictability of a simple majoritarian democracy; too often it is little more than a brute mob.  Hence our elaborate structure of checks and balances and division of responsibilities.  But a large and persistent disconnect is still something to be explored.  It might be the right outcome, but perhaps it is indicative of a deeper problem.  

Every ordinary political/policy survey has to be taken with a desiccant mountain of salt and so this is merely interesting rather than in any fashion probative.  

80 percent of those surveyed favored photo ID requirements when voting.  18 percent said they opposed. 2 percent were undecided.  Americans, by a large majority, want strong and secure voting identification.

91 percent of Republicans supported photo ID.  87 percent of Independents supported photo ID. 62 percent of Democrats supported photo ID when voting.  There is strong support across partisan lines for photo ID in elections.  

77 percent of white voters supported photo ID.  84 percent of non-white voters support photo ID when voting.

69 percent of Americans with a four-year college degree favored ID, while 85 percent of those with no degree favored it. 

78 percent of Americans aged 18 to 34 supported it, 82 percent of those aged 35 to 54 supported it, and 79 percent of people aged 55 and older supported it. 

81 percent of people who make less than $50,000 a year favored photo ID when voting, while 82 percent of people who make between $50,000 and $100,000 supported it, and 76 percent of people who make more than $100,000 supported it. 

There are few policy issues where there is near such unanimity across income, age, education attainment or race as these numbers seem to indicate.   

If a supermajority of Americans regardless of race (77-84% support), income (76-82% support), age (78-82% support), education attainment (69-85% support) support photo ID when voting, why is it such a bone of contention in Congress and in some States?  

Just as in Britain back in the 70-80s and the death penalty, this is not a political or partisan issue.  It is an indicator of a disconnect between the citizenry and the politicians they elect to represent them.  

Sometimes it can be seen as a good thing.  There is an argument to be made that cool headed politicians considering the full range of implications of the death penalty are a necessary and desirable brake on the occasionally hot-headed public.

But it can just as easily be seen as a bad thing.  In this instance, why would it be a good thing for the leadership of both parties be at such odds with their own constituents and even their own local party members?  It sure can look like politicians of whatever partisan stripe wanting to choose who can vote for them rather than ensuring that all citizens (and only citizens) can vote.  Which is what a supermajority of Americans want.