The Associated Press is reporting that Alaska Governor Sean Parnell (R) — who is the only governor not to apply for a federal Health Insurance Exchange Planning Grant, which funds the preparations for an online exchange — will not enact the federal health care overhaul “after a judge in Florida struck down the law as unconstitutional“:

Parnell, who sought the advice of his attorney general amid concerns implementing the law would violate his oath of office, told the Juneau Chamber of Commerce the state would pursue lawful, market-based solutions to making insurance affordable and accessible to Alaskans.

He said the Florida judge’s ruling is the law of the land, as it pertains to Alaska, barring implementation of the federal law here. He said the state will pursue options of its own instead.

Failing to implement the law or establish an exchange would require the federal government to step in and offer Alaskans coverage through a federal-based insurance exchange. Funding for a federal exchange — which will cost $235.9 million — is part of the administration’s FY 2012 budget request.

Parnell is the only anti-reform governor who is using his opposition to the Affordable Care Act to prevent his state from applying for federal grants to help regulators police unreasonable insurance health premiums, plan for the exchanges, and most other grants (Alaskan businesses and seniors are taking advantage of the law, however). A number of the other 25 states that are part of the multi-state challenge have sent back a portion of the federal grants, but all have accepted a far greater portion of the early benefits of reform.

Alaska, meanwhile, is suffering from a fairly severe health care crisis and would stand to benefit from the aforementioned grants to employers and regulators. Nineteen percent of Alaskans and 12 percent of children are without insurance coverage and the state’s health care costs tend to grow faster than the national average.

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) is claiming that he doesn’t “want anyone to lose their job.” My colleague Ellen-Marie Whelan has produced this interactive estimating how many jobs would be lost under the GOP’s continuing resolution to slash community health centers (CHC). Republicans are proposing to cut $1 billion from the FY 2010 baseline funding, which would translate into a loss of more than 178,000 jobs. Boehner’s home state of Ohio would lose 3,125 jobs:

What kind of jobs? First, and most obviously, these health centers directly employ people in their communities, including doctors, nurses, other health professionals, and key entry-level jobs. The centers provide training on-site and other community-based opportunities. And they purchase goods and services from local businesses and expand and build new locations. All of these activities create additional jobs.

Look (and click here for the interactive):

Whelan estimates that defunding Affordable Care Act (and its $11 billion for community health centers) — the GOP’s other priority — would mean a loss of even more economic activity and eliminate nearly 300,000 jobs in 2015. (See that map here.)

Ironically, Republicans have long supported CHCs as a means of expanding coverage. Former President George W. Bush doubled U.S. financing for community health centers and Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-KY) — who put together the Republican CR — has described CHCs as “essential,” regularly touting new federal funds for CHCs in his district.

Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-MT) has offered an amendment to the continuing resolution that would destabilize federal health reform by blocking any spending that can be used for “any employee, officer, contractor, or grantee of any department or agency” funded by the Affordable Care Act. The measure would “block about $41 million in spending to implement the federal health-reform law through September” and is expected to be introduced on the floor later today. Here is the full text:

None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for any employee, officer, contractor, or grantee of any department or agency funded by title VIII of division B of this Act to implement the provisions of Public Law 111-148 or title I or subtitle B of title II of Public Law 111–152.

Rather than defunding any specific provisions, Rehberg is going after the discretionary funds that are needed to implement it. Should the House adopt this amendment and it survive in the Senate, the Department of Health and Human Services would have to stretch its $1 billion implementation fund to maintain the hundreds of employees responsible for drafting regulations and maintaining the ACA — an impossible task given the fund’s other obligations.

Of the more than 500 employees responsible for implementing the law, an untold number would find themselves without a job and the law itself would be seriously hampered. Not only would implementation screech to a halt, but many of the existing regulations — that have not yet been finalized — would also be jeopardized. Rehberg is effectively deregulating the health care sector by defunding the regulators and thereby protecting himself from the charge that he’s directly rescinding some of the laws most popular consumer protections.

Meanwhile, House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) said today that he didn’t want anyone to lose their job. “I don’t want anyone to lose their job, whether they’re a federal employee or not,” Boehner said at his weekly press conference. “But come on, we’re broke.”