National Journal conducts a weekly "Insider's Poll," which, as the name implies, questions DC players about political stories of the day. As the WSJ noted, the poll is "generally a good reflection of conventional wisdom among strategists, lobbyists, consultants, pollsters and party operatives inside the Beltway."

This week's survey asked insiders: "Does Mitt Romney need to address the issue of his religious faith the way that John F. Kennedy did in 1960?" The results showed that 59% of Republicans, and 44% of Democrats said, "Yes, and soon."

Robert Novak recently noted the same trend. "Although disagreement remains within the Romney camp, the consensus is that he must address the Mormon question with a speech deploring bias," Novak wrote a couple of weeks ago. "According to campaign sources, a speech has been written, though much of it could still be changed."

I don't doubt that Romney's faith tradition is controversial in some conservative circles, but I haven't the foggiest idea what he could say about it to overcome some voters' prejudice. Answering the "Mormon question" isn't nearly as easy as it sounds.

The notion that Romney could deliver a JFK-like speech is rather silly, for reasons that have nothing to do with Romney's skills. Kennedy spoke to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association on Sept. 12, 1960, and made a powerful case that his administration would be neutral on matters of faith. (It seems ridiculous in hindsight, but there was a common fear that Kennedy, as a Roman Catholic, would let the Vatican dictate U.S. policy.)

"I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute -- where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote, where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.

"I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish -- where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source, where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all."

Romney's challenge is entirely different. He can't deliver a similar speech because Republicans don't want to hear it.

Nearly a half-century after JFK's speech in Houston, many of today's conservatives, particularly those in the GOP's religious right base, abhor the very idea of church-state separation. It's not unusual to hear figures like James Dobson and Pat Robertson reject the constitutional principle's very existence.

If Romney were to publicly argue that "the separation of church and state is absolute," he would be thumbing his nose at some of the very people he hopes to impress. Conservative activists -- indeed, the very people who worry about the "Momon question" -- want more intermingling between religion and government, not less.

For that matter, the nature of the controversy is very different now than in 1960. Conservative Republicans uneasy about Romney's faith aren't worried that Salt Lake City will dictate policy through the White House; they're just not comfortable with a faith tradition with which they're unfamiliar (and in some cases, find heretical). In this sense, as a friend of mine recently argued, Romney is "boxed in" on the issue.

The "Insider's Poll" suggests the DC establishment is waiting for a grand pronouncement. Unfortunately for the campaign, there's a disconnect between what the insiders expect and what Romney can say.