It seems logical to me that a field widget could be a form element, that also happens to map directly to some underlying storage
Widgets are form elements; they just have additional capabilities a form element doesn't have. The documentation about the field widget API describe the widgets using the following words:
Widgets are Form API elements with additional processing capabilities. Widget hooks are typically called by the Field Attach API during the creation of the field form structure with field_attach_form().
Every widget is implemented using at least one form element, but a module implementing a widgets needs to implement some hooks that are not required from a form element:
While the first can be considered the equivalent of hook_element_info(), the other two are additional hooks necessary for the widgets to work. It's thanks to the information passed to hook_field_widget_form() that a widget is rendered.
Drupal could have implemented widgets expanding the properties returned from hook_element_info(), but the truth is that a widget and a form element are two different things that are used in different cases; consider a widget a more specialized type of form element.
If hook_element_info() were used also to return information about widgets, the code looking for widgets would need to filter out the form elements to keep the widget information; vice versa, the code looking for form elements should have filtered out the widget information. Considering how ofter that information is required, that is the reason why two different hooks are necessary.
Drupal could have used a "base element" property returned from hook_field_widget_info(). If such property has not been implemented, it means nobody proposed it, or it has been proposed, but it has been though to be useful on few limited cases.