How managed is your democracy?

The recent elections in Russia have gotten me thinking about the issue of managed democracy. Western academics, governments, and the media have focused their attention on some of the undemocratic processes at work in Russia. I'm certainly not a supporter of many of the electoral tricks and tactics that have been used by Putin and his allies over the course of the past decade. However, all the polling data that I've seen suggests that Putin's policies remain popular, and align with the wishes of a majority of the population. The educated, technologically-engaged younger generation in the larger cities is apt not to approve of these policies and practices, but this group is a vocal minority, rather than a repressed majority.

I would be very curious to see an indexed set of data that charts out the relationship between the expressed views and values of the population and the actual policies put in place by the governments of the world's democracies. I'd like to organize data on political, economic, social/cultural, and diplomatic affairs on a nation-by-nation basis, and chart out the degree to which each democratic government actually enacts the policies that a majority of citizens support. I'd also prepare the same data for several key non-democratic governments as well. I'd then chart the degree of divergence between the weighted views, values, and priorities of the electorate and the actual policies of the government, perhaps also factoring in areas where a party or candidate openly held an unpopular position (since voters could, presumably, take such vies into account, and thus register stronger preferences through voting than the opinions expressed in polls).

My strong suspicion is that the index of democracy management would begin climbing around 1980 in most western nations, and that it would now be quite high in western Europe, the United States, and Canada. I also suspect that several non-democratic nations, including, most significantly, China, as well as Russia, now do a better job of enacting the policies that their citizens value than do the democracies of western Europe and North America. I've read a fair bit of the polling conducted by the Pew Charitable trusts, such as an analysis of the views of ordinary Americans on whether debt reduction or job growth should be prioritized, where the congress and President both basically ignored the priorities of the electorate

I'm concerned that democracy, particularly in the United States, is managed on several different levels. Our electoral structures are archaic and intentionally un-democratic, with the electoral college, gerrymandered district boundaries and similar problems. The two main political parties have a near-stranglehold on politics, and each makes use of a series of undemocratic practices in order to ensure that acceptable candidates are put forward. Money influences the course of our elections in a myriad of ways, and gives far more weight to the votes of those who have it than to those of people who do not. The system of checks and balances also serves to limit governmental responsiveness to the will of the people, as it was always meant to do. Finally, the media serves as a filter, and press coverage further distorts electoral reality. All-in-all, I think that we'd best be very, very careful when accusing Russia of failing to hold free and fair elections...