Your speech was excellent! And, you have my full support for reform as long as it is real reform, not reform in name only. I'll just focus here on my suggested improvements.
You talked about the economic downturn. Great, but I would suggest making a connection between those economic conditions and health insurance reform. The fact is that genuine assurance of health care (single-payer) would be the greatest aid to the economy across the board for individuals, businesses small and large, cities, counties, states, organizations and anyone who employs someone or manages tax dollars and elements of the health care system. It would meet ALL of your goals thoroughly. I realize that we're not going to implement single-payer now, but the point remains. We're only taking half measures here, and, in absence of single-payer, a national government-run public option is essential.
You implied in your speech that it was only people on the left who favored single-payer. Not so - fully 75% of people favor at least a government-operated public health assurance option. A substantial number of those folks have insurance now and a substantial number must be conservative and moderate. Single-payer is not the far left idea you portrayed it to be. We, the citizens, have been very clear about what we want.
As it stands now, our plan is a boon for the for-profit health insurers who are not in need of financial help. There are some consumer-friendly changes to be sure. However, I caution that what is said in speeches be matched by what is in the bills. For example, I understand that, although we have been repeatedly told that people will not be excluded from coverage due to pre existing conditions, the bills don't contain that reform.
Your goals are 1) Security and stability for those who have insurance 2) Insurance for those who don't have it and 3) Holding down costs. Simply put, you cannot achieve 3) without the government-operated public health assurance option available widely.