Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, an up and coming star in the Republican Party, gave quite a performance at the Blair House Summit on health care a couple of weeks back when he dissected the Senate health care bill and characterized it as a budget buster.

Ryan made the case that "the true 10-year cost of this bill in 10 years" is $2.3 trillion, not just under $1 trillion as characterized by the White House and congressional supporters.Ryan also took on the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office projections that the health care reform bill will end up reducing the federal deficit by cutting costs and boosting revenues. The CBO reached a wrong conclusion because it was given wrong numbers, said Ryan.

Ryan's argument has continued to reverberate around the Internet, bolstering claims that the health care plan, if passed, would be a fiscal disaster.

But maybe not.

Ezra Klein, a columnist and blogger for the Washington Post, who for the last year has focused his attention on the complexities of health care reform, took apart Ryan's argument and reached different conclusions. Ryan, he said, did score some legitimate points, including that Democrats, intent on keeping the costs below the $1 trillion line, are really only counting six years of expenses, not 10.

But Klein also found Ryan used "a couple of dirty tricks." Ryan characterizes as sinister and unusual accounting practices that in reality have long been accepted by both parties. Ryan points to Medicare cost increases that will come online whether a bill passes or not, but attributes them entirely to the bill. In a nutshell, Ryan includes numbers that bolster his argument and conveniently ignores facts that do not back it up, Klein contends.

The bill might cost $2.3 trillion, as Ryan maintains, but it either raises or saves $2.95 trillion, for a net deficit reduction of about $650 billion.

Klein has a great clincher, a call he made to Robert Reischauer, the head of the Urban Institute. Reischauer is a former CBO director, whose honest and unattractive cost estimates helped kill Hillarycare in 1994 and probably made him a life-long enemy of the Clintons.

Klein said he called Reischauer and asked whether he thought the Senate bill made fiscal sense. "Were I in Congress and asked to vote on this," he replied, "I'd vote in favor." The bill isn't perfect, he continued, "but it at least has the prospect for creating a platform over which more significant and far-reaching cost containment can be enacted."

To read Ryan's arguments about the high cost of the bill, go here. Then check out Klein's rebuttal. Warning, this is pretty thick stuff. You feel as if you should qualify for an accounting certificate after reading it. On the other hand, if you are reading it on the computer at work you will look intent and busy.

If you'd rather reduce the health care debate to slogans and sound bites, it is probably best if you don't bother.