wales. coverage begins at 1:30 eastern on cspan3. >> this afternoon a discussion with virginia democratic senator mark warner, democratic representative lauren underwood of illinois and republican representative will heard of texas on the progress capitol hill has made in investigating cyber security threats. the event will be hosted by the aspen institute. watch live at 2:00 p.m. eastern on cspan3 or listen on the free radio app. joining us from capitol hill is congressman john rose, who represents the sixth district of tennessee in central tennessee. good morning, congressman rose. >> good morning. thank you for having me on today. >> absolutely. we started the program talking about the election, president trump's comments on facebook. i wanted to get your thoughts on the president's efforts to

contest the election in several states across the country and his efforts last night, comments last night. >> sure. first i say elections have to accomplish two purposes, first of all they have to decide the outcome, a winner, in this case the presidency. but secondly they have to do that in a manner that satisfies the loser and the loser's supporters that the outcome is just. i think that's where this election probably has fallen short. so i think it's understandable that the president and many of his supporters, including me, have many questions about this election. frankly we saw an unprecedented number of changes to the election procedures across the country. many of those procedures not tested before this election. most of those procedures resulting in a delay in getting to an answer. and now we see a rush to judgment. despite having introduced

untested proceduresprocedures, questionable procedures in some cases you may say, now many want to push past the actual careful counting of the ballots and the scrutiny that is deserved to make sure this raft of new procedures are implemented in a just way. and so, i think the president's justice departmen justified. i think it's for the good of the democracy that we continue to dig into this matter and make sure, as much so as possible under the circumstances, that we see to it that every legal vote is counted. and that every illegal vote or inappropriate vote is not counted. and i'm not sure we're there yet. and frankly, i'm not sure that the current constitutional calendar with respect to the presidential election allows enough time to appropriately and thoroughly get to the end of the question. >> i was going to ask you that.

in addition to the legal challenges that the trump campaign is mounting, has mounted and decisions in a number of states on that, how do you do that? you verify that to the satisfaction of those who voted for donald trump and to the candidate, the president himself? >> sure. i think if the shoe were on the other foot under the current circumstances, we would see probably the same hesitation from biden supporters to accept the outcome of the election and i think they'd be justified in doing so. i think we see here illustrated in very graphic terms why it was perhaps ill advised for so many of our states to change their election procedures, to lower the hurdles that need to be met to make sure that ballots are submitted appropriately and from the voter. we've gone down a path of wanting to make sure that everyone who wants to vote can vote. and now we're in a position

we're trying to verify that everyone who did vote was supposed to be able to vote. i'm not sure the government is as good at that as they should be. a lot of questions about the proprietary of the election. the most compelling things we've seen are the statistical anomalies that exist that would raise questions about the election. we've seen one to three percent of mail-in ballots rejected. however in states we are seeing that as low hundredths of a percent rejection rate. that raises questions. i think we also probably we're having to relearn painfully some of the things we learned in history. we know from historical precedent, i would point to our own state of tennessee that absentee ballots and mail-in ballots are an area ripe for

fraud. we've had congressional races in tennessee that have had to be redone because of election fraud. not so many years ago. and that fraud many times was focused on the abuse of the absentee ballot system. essentially the mail-in ballot system. so that fraud does happen it does happen at a systemic level. it happens at a level that has historically required the overturning of elections. that would be unprecedented obviously in a presidential election. and i think if we're going to favor policies that take us down the path of of having per miss sieve voting rules and regulations we may have to look at readjusting the constitutional calendar for the presidential election so as to allow adequate time for those votes to be counted. >> john rose re-elected to a second term representing tennessee's sixth district. how did your election go?

>> it went very well. thank you for asking. overwhelming support in the sixth district of tennessee. so very humbled to have the support of so many of my fellow tenness tennesseeans in the sixth district and look forward to the opportunity to represent them for what would be my second term in the u.s. house of representatives. >> also on the house financial services committee. front page of "the washington journal" this morning, on capitol hill another joust over fed lending measures. the fed chair and the treasury secretary, one of the takeaways from that financial services committee, congressman rose, was the explanation by the treasury secretary and why he pulled back some of the funding in the early coronavirus measures. what's your reaction to that? >> i think the treasury secretary, steve mnuchin did a very able job of explaining that he is simply following the

statutory requirements of the c.a.r.e.s. act in taking the steps to comply with the statutory provisions and wind down the program by december 31st of this year. now there are provisions in the act that allow existing loans that have been made to be administered and adjusted over time but the congress did not give. the treasury secretary and the administration the latitude to change the law unilaterally. that requires legislative action. there were some who might wish to see him take different steps thankfully he's following the law. >> the wall street journal piece said steve mnuchin said it would be better used on another pandemic relief bill and there

was word yesterday that the house speaker has agreed to or approved of the measure proposed in the senate. $908 billion on pandemic relief. what's your feeling on that measure? >> i think there is a need for timely, targeted, temporary additional relief to the economy, obviously we've seen some additional shutdowns around the country. thankfully in tennessee our state and local leaders have done really i think better than average, maybe far better than average frankly in terms of managing the economy and the impact of the pandemic in tennessee, i think other states could maybe copy their playbook and follow the directives that they've set down. so i think there, unfortunately, is a need for some additional timely targeted, temporary relief. think secretary mnuchin and chairman powell pointed out some

of the areas that might be best applied and i'm supportive of that. unfortunately, a while back in the spring we came together in a bipartisan set of packages to provide relief early in the pandemic. speaker pelosi decided, as early as may, that she wanted to pursue a very bipartisan wish list of items in a bill called the heroes act that would have provided $3.4 trillion in additional spending that was not targeted at relief for the pandemic but was really aimed at achieving very partisan ideological goals that democrats have had. and she decided that nothing was better than something, using her own words, nothing was better than something. and that's been very damaging i think, because as i said, i think timely relief is needed in very targeted areas. and that relief has not come in

time in many cases. so we've seen a number of small businesses all across the country failing because of congress' failure to work in a bipartisan way. so i'm -- i guess, i'm encouraged to hear that perhaps the speaker now is willing to back off the extreme views that she has had. i think she made the decision that it was probably better politically for democrats not to pass additional relief in a timely manner so we left a lot of businesses in the lurch in the meantime. >> we welcome your calls and comments for representative rose. we'll go to florida and hear from h, republican line. >> yes, sir. representative, i was listening to your prior guest, and he was

stating that you are superstitious or believe in magic or such things if you believe any of these things happen during the election, there's something wrong with people who see things that are not there but they say they're there. look, i'm sitting here and representative raskin, who was saying all of that is one of a very few congressmen, just a couple when they came into office, their first actions in 1917 were trying to decertify trump's election because they said russian interference and voter suppression. we spent three years looking for russian interference and ukrainian things, not there. voter suppression not there. this is ridiculous we can see videos on the internet or the tv where poll watchers are forced

out of a room and then the people inside are cheering and they're putting up cardboard so nobody can look in. >> we'll get a response. congressman rose? >> sure. i share the caller's concern that many on the other side of the aisle in the democratic party over the last four years refused to accept the legitimacy of the 2016 election. they refuse to acknowledge the legitimacy of the duellly elect president so it's rich now they're in a rush to judgment to identify biden as the president-elect. over the last four years we've had to endure a litany of conspiracy theories, almost all of which now have been not only disproven but have been shown to have been hatched by the former secretary of state hillary clinton and her campaign in the 2016 election. and unfortunately we're given life by the obama/biden

administration, their justice department, their national security apparatus that breathed life into those conspiracy theories sw and used them unfortunately fairly effectively to deter the president and the administration in some cases to delay the installation of policies of the president that reflected the value and interests of those who supported him in the election of 2016. so i think it's not -- i don't think it's too much now, particularly in light of all the issues that i mentioned about changes to election laws around the country for us to take a very careful, close look at the processes and the questions that surround the 2020 election. and i hear a lot of folks say, there is no evidence. that's just not true. there is evidence. and frankly, i think it's too high a standard when it comes to

our national elections, it should not be just the obligation of the losing candidate to put up or shut up so to speak, we as a nation have an interest in getting to the bottom of any problems with our electoral process. so i think we should have our federal officials and law enforcement officials and election folks who look at these things, they should be actively investigating and seeking out the truth. and we deserve that as a country, our democracy needs that, the republic needs that if it is to survive. >> we'll go to sam in maryland, democrat's line. >> you talk about fraud in the election. there's fraud all right. and the fraud is donald trump. donald trump is the biggest liar in american history. donald trump says he won the election. donald trump said he won the election easily. if that's true, and if there's

so much fraud, how come every judge who's looked at this has found no fraud and giuliani and the other lawyers for the president haven't alleged frauds when they made their arguments? you're a liar, mr. rose. >> we'll let you go. in terms of the courts, is this potential -- would you like to see something come eventually to the supreme court? >> well, i -- you know, i don't know that this would rise to that level. through our constitutional framework have a federal system. the constitution clearly sets up the procedures that states decide how our presidential elections and federal elections are conducted in each of the many individual states. that said, obviously we're choosing the president of this country. and so, it's important that those systems and those procedures be reliable and that

there be integrity and as i said earlier, you know, the election results not only have to pick a winner at the end of the day, they have to do so in a manner that the loser and the loser's supporters are readily willing to accept that as a just outcome. i might say americans know that you win some and you lose some. but they're not willing to accept a rigged game. and so, i think there are serious questions here, we ought to get to the bottom of them. whether we can do so or not in a timely way, i don't know. i'm a little skeptical about that frankly given the electoral college date is coming up here in just a handful of days. and so, you know -- but that -- we will get to the bottom of this. i trust in time. we've had elections in the past where there have been problems like this. i think of the 1960 election. where ultimately we got to kind of the bottom of that issue and found