Right-wing Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli (R-VA) does not like the Affordable Care Act. In addition to his challenge to the law in federal court, he told a Politico reporter earlier this month that there was little the federal government could do to states if they refused to implement the law.

The Washington Post quoted the interview:

In a brief interview at the Republican Attorneys General Association meeting, Cuccinelli said it would be “contrary to the law” not to implement it. But he pointed out that it might not be easy for the federal government to force states to comply if they continued to resist. “It’s not like there’s criminal penalties out there — it becomes a power struggle,” he said. Cuccinelli noted that it would not be the first time that states have tried to obstruct federal laws, pointing out that states resisted complying with the Alien and Sedition Acts and fugitive slave laws. “There have been periods of time when states have just thrown their hands up and said, ‘We’re not going to do this,’” he said. “It’s still possible, but it’s outside the expected legal structure.

But when pressed on this subject yesterday, Virginia Organizing caught him striking a rather different tone — saying “I expect everyone to obey the law,” if it is upheld by the Supreme Court.

Watch the video:

It’s wonderful that Cuccinelli now wants everyone to obey the law. Perhaps he might start with himself.

As the Supreme Court prepares to take up the question of the constitutionality of health care reform, a new report finds that almost all the states have begun implementing parts of the Affordable Care Act — suggesting that even the court’s rejection of the measure won’t be able to stop many of the law’s big changes.

According to a new survey from the Commonwealth Fund, “49 states and the District of Columbia have already taken action supporting the law’s implementation, such as passing legislation, issuing regulations or other guidance, or actively reviewing insurer filings.” Between January 1, 2010, and January 1, 2012, “23 states and the District of Columbia had taken new legislative or regulatory action on at least one of these reforms” — which include changes like expanding dependent coverage for young adults up to age 26, prohibiting lifetime limits on health benefits, and phasing out annual dollar limits on health benefits — and an additional 26 states had “taken other action to promote compliance with the reforms, such as issuing bulletins to insurers.” States took the following actions:

– 12 states: Connecticut, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Nebraska, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Virginia—passed new legislation or issued new regulations that addressed all 10 of the reforms: expanding dependent coverage for young adults up to age 26, prohibiting lifetime limits on health benefits, phasing out annual dollar limits on health benefits, prohibiting preexisting condition exclusions for children under age 19, prohibiting rescissions (cancelling insurance, except in cases of fraud or intentional misrepresentation), covering preventive services without cost-sharing, expanding coverage of emergency services, allowing choice of primary care provider, allowing choice of pediatrician, and allowing access to obstetricians and gynecologists without a referral.

– The District of Columbia and 11 states: California, Delaware, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin—passed a new law or issued a new regulation on at least one early market reform.

– 15 states: Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Texas—issued new subregulatory guidance, such as a bulletin to advise insurers of the reforms.

– 11 states: Alaska, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Wyoming—reported that regulators were actively reviewing insurer filings for compliance with the reforms even though the state had not otherwise passed a new law or issued new regulations or other guidance.

– Only Arizona had taken no action.

Indeed, it seems that the law has already created an unstoppable momentum towards change. As Jeffrey Young pointed out yesterday, “health insurance companies, hospitals and the rest of the health care system already have made deep changes to the way they operate: adding new consumer protections to health plans, altering the way medical providers get paid and beginning to work closer together to improve health and save money” — and it’s very unlikely that they will take away these new benefits or obtain efforts to modernize their operations (in an effort to reduce spending). Regardless of the Supreme Court’s anticipated ruling on the law in late June, the changes the ACA inspired are here to stay — in one form or another.

During an interview on MSNBC this morning, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) voiced rare support for Planned Parenthood, noting that the organization provides much-needed preventive care to low-income women. The outgoing Texas senator also condemned a recently-enacted Texas law that prohibits Planned Parenthood from participating in the Medicaid program and providing health care services to some 130,000 women. The controversial measure has led the federal government to officially stop funding the Texas Women’s Health Program, but Gov. Rick Perry (R) insists that the state will fill the funding gap using state funds.

Hutchison criticized Perry’s decision to turn his back on the federal dollars, which she argued, provide critical care to lower-income women:

HUTCHISON: We cannot afford to lose the Medicaid funding for low income women to have health care services. We cannot. We keep turning back federal funds that every state gets and then try to find money in our budget, which is already being cut in key areas like education. I do think that the governor needs to sit down with the federal government and work it out so we can have our share — our fair share not more — of money for Medicaid to help low-income women have their health care services.

TODD: So it sounds like you think he should not be excluding Planned Parenthood?

HUTCHISON: I think Planned Parenthood does mammograms, they do so much of the health care — the preventive health care and they’re doing that, we need to provide those services, absolutely.

Watch it:

During an interview with American Public Media’s Marketplace, President Obama defended the individual health insurance mandate and reiterated that likely GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney enacted a very similar policy as governor of Massachusetts. “[W]e designed a program that actually previously had support of Republicans,” Obama told host Kai Ryssdal, “including the person who may end up being the Republican standard bearer and is now pretending like he came up with something different.”

Obama also predicted that the Supreme Court — which is scheduled to hear oral arguments on the constitutionality of reform on Monday — will uphold the law and that “it will be very hard for any governor to explain why it is that they’re not giving people…an opportunity to get cheaper health insurance, better deal, more protections because of some ideological argument that they’re having with the president.” “And when people see that in fact it works, it makes sense — as it’s, by the way, working in Massachusetts — then I think a whole bunch of folks will say ‘Why aren’t we trying it as well?’” he added. Listen: