tonight, julie rovner of npr is back to help us out. >> thanks, judey. >> woodruff: so we just saw the story of the montez family in colorado. generally who is eligible to apply for and get a subsidy like the one they got? >> it's people who are in between 100% and 400%6 poverty. people don't realize there is actually a floor. if you earn under 100%6 poverty are you not eligible to purchase on the exchange it was assumed those people would be getting the expanded medicaid, in the states that are doing that they will, in the other half of the states they could fall between the cracks, but if you are up to 400% of poverty, that is about $46,000 for an individual, up to about $94,000, so well into the middle class for a family of four, you will be eligible for some subsidy. obviously the subsidies are larger the lower your income is and smaller as your income gets higher. >> if you are not clear about it, you go to the web site and you start to put in information, that's when you find out whether you are eligible. >> that's how it is supposed to work. and that's been a lot of where the pr

and julie rovner of npr is back with us to help. welcome back. >> nice to be here. >> woodruff: so it is understandable why kathleen baker is upset, 61% increase in what she would pay. what is your sense? what's our understanding of the likelihood that she'll be able to keep the current policy? >> we really don't know. this was something, of course, the president tried to sort of plug in last week, as a way to try to at least not make good on his promise try to make a little better on his promise. it's very complicated. he started out if you like your plan you can keep it. and then if you like your plan you can keep it maybe one more year and if your insurance company says so, and then it became if your insurance company says so but if your state insurer says so and now maybe not that. >> woodruff: the president met with some state insurance commissioners. how are they reacting? they have they have some stay. >> they're reacting all across the board. only a hand full of states have really said. it turns out it's even more complicate

as npr's astute health care reporter julie rovner reminded us recently. >> when it became clear thathhs would need more money to build the federal exchange than had been allocated in the original law, republicans in congress refused to provide it. >> so to get it started, officials had to scrape together money from a variety of other offices. this happened back in the '30s after congress passed social security but failed to sufficiently fund the board that was supposed to run it. republican opponents of obama care have gone further. after it passed they stalked it like jack the ripper. in the states, through the courts, all the way to the supreme court, which, uh-oh, ruled it constitutional. in last year's election when they lost again. but quit? never. for republicans, this has become their alamo. in july, less than three months before scheduled launch, the speaker of the house, republican john boehner, drew one more line in the sand. >> obama care is bad for america. we're going to do everything we can to make sure that it never happens. >> and yet the darn thing survived, despite