LOS ANGELES – Monday, Barack Obama has planned visits to both Keene and Nashua, cities in New Hampshire. Hillary Clinton is holding a “Conversation With Rural Nevadans” and Mitt Romney will hopscotch from an evening barbecue in Orange County to an “Ask Mitt Anything” session in Nevada.

Impressive schedules indeed, but no competition for John Edwards’ schedule for the day. Edwards plans to visit no fewer than six cities on his “Fighting for One America” bus tour.

All of this for an election that, at press time, stands an amazing 446 days away.

Politics in America have reached a record level of early campaigning — a problem not only for the candidates’ budgets, but for the nation as a whole.

Presidential candidates nearly always hold some sort of political office. Obama, Clinton and Edwards are all senators. The other candidates include governors and congressional representatives. These people are supposed to be running the country, not running around it holding publicity stunt after press conference after speech.

Americans are no strangers to expensive campaigns — much of the media coverage from the 2004 election focused on then-candidate George Bush’s $150 million “war chest.” But there’s a difference between spending money and demanding the public’s attention over a year in advance.

Compare the presidential race to leadership campaigns in other countries and the state of American politics becomes downright illogical.

France’s highly contested 2007 election was treated to an 85 percent voter turnout for the first round. The official candidate list was released on March 19. The campaign’s first televised debate for the runoff took place on May 2.

The election was four days away.

If the length of the campaigns is any measure, the French are about 90 percent more efficient in their elections than Americans (and that’s even pushing the “start” of the ’08 campaign to the recent AFL-CIO Presidential Candidates Forum, ignoring appearances like the one Edwards made to UCLA’s campus last year). It was at the forum that moderator Keith Olbermann pointedly asked each candidate if it bothers them that the race to replace them “will begin possibly only days into (their) first term.”

In response, Sen. Joseph Biden offered an explanation for the premature campaigning. Speaking for the American people, he said, “The reason the campaign started so early now is because we’re so angry, we’re so frustrated. We know how badly this president has ruined this country.”

Biden’s politically savvy answer only passes the blame for the precipitate campaigning. He is clearly a part of the problem.

No matter why “The Race For The White House” has started so early, it seems unlikely to capture voter turnout rates reminiscent of France’s last election. Eventually, Americans shall tire of the endless barrage of shallow news coverage, ranging from prices of haircuts to colors of jackets, with little attention to true politics.

In fact, voting for any candidate who lets a campaign take so much time away from their important careers is odd. Why put someone in a higher office when their current behavior suggests they would focus more on re-election than the life-and-death matters presidents must deal with?

And if the public is expected to start making decisions so far in advance in a world where Americans have been reminded how quickly things can change, who’s to say that these politicians won’t face tests in their own jobs before given the chance to fulfill a higher duty?

Before America tires of the campaign, an “Ask Mitt Anything” session or a “Fight For One America” press stop is a great opportunity to ask the candidates to go home, sleep next to their spouses, and have dinner with their children. We’ll listen to them next year.

Bummed that John Edwards isn’t visiting your city today?