RMI 2101 Temple De Regulation Case Study Discussion

September 19, 2022

RMI 2101 Temple De Regulation Case Study Discussion

Order ID:89JHGSJE83839

Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago

Pages:5-10

Instructions:

RMI 2101 Temple De Regulation Case Study Discussion

Please read and reference the articles under “Medical Marijuana – Topic 6” in the case studies folder on the bulk pack to answer this assignment. You will also have to do some research on your own to answer the questions. Please cite (a list of links is fine) the sources you used at the end of your assignment.

Shortly describe how states are able to legalize marijuana when it is still illegal at the federal level. Be specific about the laws/memorandum that allow this. (1 pt)

Name 3 specific TRM loss exposures that marijuana producers (i.e. growers and/or retailers) face unrelated to the legality of marijuana. (3 pts)

For one of the 3 risks named, answer the following question: If there were no legal concerns, would traditional insurance be a good risk management technique? Why or why not? (Reference each of the “requirements of an insurable risk”) (3 pts)

How does the federal legal status impact how insurance works for marijuana-related businesses? Describe challenges/risks for both the insurer and the insured. (3 pts)

If I buy legal, recreational-use marijuana when I am in Boston, I am charged an ATM fee if I use a debit card. Why do you think this happens? Think about banking laws. (1 pt)

How have some states (specifically California) acted to help grow their marijuana-related insurance business? (1 pt)

In one sentence, what is a captive insurer? (1 pt)

How could captives be a useful alternative to traditional insurance for the marijuana industry? (2 pts)

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.

Methodology

58-53 points

Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.

83-76 points

Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.

52-49 points

Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.

75-1 points

Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.

48-1 points

There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met