President Barack Obama's support for limited offshore oil exploration isn't in the same league as Sarah Palin's "Drill, baby, drill" battle cry of recent months.
But Obama's call to end moratoria on drilling off parts of the Atlantic coast, the Gulf of Mexico and the northern Alaska coast prompted immediate complaints. Environmental groups lamented the real possibility of more oil spills.
Petroleum executives complained Obama hadn't gone far enough _ as if that would be possible unless he opened the entire country to exploration. Obama's plan deserves at least some praise because it has a practical side.
The nation does need to search for what Obama called "traditional sources of fuel" to reduce reliance on imported crude. However, the proposal also raises legitimate concerns, starting with potential ecological threats.
Congress must be clear that, if it moves forward on this initiative, federal oversight will be focused and punishment for environmental violations will be swift and meaningful.
Another concern: The drilling news must be wrapped in a strong presidential restatement of commitment to promoting renewable energy with word, deed and federal support.
With Wednesday's announcement _ and Obama's recent promotion of more nuclear power _ he risks slipping out of the good graces of environmental groups. He now is courting congressional support for other initiatives such as a bill to reduce carbon emissions.
It's a plan that might work, although victory could be far off. But offshore drilling could have long-term environmental costs.
Any proposal endorsed by Congress must require that future exploration be done carefully and with strong federal supervision.
