Well, we can always do a search. Here's the first few that come up:
But how will they do it? What actual positions will Democrats highlight, in their quest to pin Republicans to oil? CongressDaily's Dan Friedman reports:
The White House and Senate Democrats are linking the spill to a resolution by Senate Energy and Natural Resources ranking member Lisa Murkowski disapproving of EPA's ability to regulate greenhouse gases, energy and climate change legislation that could hit the floor in July and even tax "extenders" legislation now on the floor.
Those steps follow repeated Democratic efforts to win unanimous consent to lift a federal oil spill liability cap for companies. Each time they ripped Republicans for blocking the measures.
For more energy and environment articles as well as blogs, videos and related materials, see the National Journal Group's expanded energy and environment page.
Republicans call such efforts politicization of the disaster. Democrats say bringing up the spill draws a valid contrast between the parties and is unavoidable given concern with the Gulf disaster.
Oil Spill Politics: Democratic Maneuvers - Politics - The Atlantic
In truth, culpability for the disaster can more accurately be laid at the Bush Administration's doorstep. For eight years, George Bush's presidency infected the oil industry's oversight agency, the Minerals Management Service, with a septic culture of corruption from which it has yet to recover. Oil patch alumnae in the White House encouraged agency personnel to engineer weakened safeguards that directly contributed to the gulf catastrophe.
The absence of an acoustical regulator -- a remotely triggered dead man's switch that might have closed off BP's gushing pipe at its sea floor wellhead when the manual switch failed (the fire and explosion on the drilling platform may have prevented the dying workers from pushing the button) -- was directly attributable to industry pandering by the Bush team. Acoustic switches are required by law for all offshore rigs off Brazil and in Norway's North Sea operations. BP uses the device voluntarily in Britain's North Sea and elsewhere in the world as do other big players like Holland's Shell and France's Total. In 2000, the Minerals Management Service while weighing a comprehensive rulemaking for drilling safety, deemed the acoustic mechanism "essential" and proposed to mandate the mechanism on all gulf rigs.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: Sex, Lies and Oil Spills
Former Vice President Dick Cheney’s secret energy commission meetings with Big Oil execs and hunting trips with Supreme Court Justices, are now being called into question concerning the catastrophic British Petroleum Oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Did Cheney give OK to oil companies to pass on $500,000 remote control shut-off switches?
Former gasoline sales executive Mike Toth of Akron Ohio says, “As to the switches, I believe that they have been long required in North Sea drilling.”
The real problem here is lack of transparency. Neither BP (NYSE: BP) or the government can be trusted to provide accurate information. We can’t even get a straight number concerning the volume of oil leaking. As Dr. Campbell, a former chief geologist and vice-president at a string of oil majors including BP, Shell, Fina, Exxon and ChevronTexaco, explains, “When I was the boss of an oil company I would never tell the truth. It’s not part of the game.”
http://www.halfwaytoconcord.com/blame-cheney-for-bp-oil-spill/
I wouldn't say any of this convicts Cheney, or that even if deregulation during the republican years did play a role that it negates any other error or blame. I suspect there is more than enough blame to go around, but think a better approach would be to ask exactly what happened and why, and what factors hurt or hindered the response. I can't see anyone looking real good.