There was no shortage of proposition-related updates during the month of June, so below is a list of all the recent initiatives that have qualified, entered circulation, or failed.

1535. (11-0066) Elimination of Benefits for Part-Time Local Officials. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
Initiative Failed to Qualify

1534. (11-0065) Undocumented Immigrants. Requires State Law Enforcement Officers to Enforce Federal Immigration Law. Denies Driver's Licenses to Undocumented Immigrants. Initiative Statute.
Initiative Failed to Qualify

1533. (11-0060) Health Insurance. Initiative Statute.
Initiative Failed to Qualify

570. (11-0099) Genetically Engineered Foods. Mandatory Labeling. Inititative Statute.
Qualified for the November 6, 2012, General Election.

1530. (11-0057) Three Strikes Law. Sentencing for Repeat Felony Offenders. Initiative Statute.
Qualified for the November 6, 2012, General Election.

1585. (12-0013) Nuclear Power. Initiative Statute.
New Initiative Cleared for Circulation.

1538. (11-0061) State Funding to Local Governments. Criminal Justice. Social Services. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
Initiative Failed to Qualify.

1536. (11-0069) Equal Male/Female Membership of Legislature. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
Initiative Failed to Qualify.

1540. (11-0067) Legislature Expansion. Legislative Process. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
Initiative Failed to Qualify.

1539. (11-0062) Online K-12 Education. College Preparatory Courses. Initiative Statute.
Initiative Failed to Qualify.

1544. (11-0073) Marijuana Legalization. Initiative Statute.
Initiative Failed to Qualify.

Since our last update, several new ballot measures have qualified for the November ballot. Here’s a rundown on what to expect in the fall, as the ballot now has 11 measures, and the latest are below:

Three Strikes Law. Sentencing for Repeat Felony Offenders. Initiative Statute.
Summary Date: 12/15/11 | Qualified: 06/11/12 | Signatures Required: 504,760
Revises three strikes law to impose life sentence only when new felony conviction is serious or violent. Authorizes re-sentencing for offenders currently serving life sentences if third strike conviction was not serious or violent and judge determines sentence does not pose unreasonable risk to public safety. Continues to impose life sentence penalty if third strike conviction was for certain non-serious, non-violent sex or drug offenses or involved firearm possession. Maintains life sentence penalty for felons with non-serious, non-violent third strike if prior convictions were for rape, murder, or child molestation. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: State savings related to prison and parole operations that potentially range in the high tens of millions of dollars annually in the short run, possibly exceeding $100 million annually in the long run. Increased state and county costs in the millions to low tens of millions of dollars annually in the first few years, likely declining substantially in future years, for state court activities and county jail, community supervision, and court-related activities.

Genetically Engineered Foods. Mandatory Labeling. Initiative Statute.
Summary Date: 02/14/12 | Qualified: 06/11/12 | Signatures Required: 504,760

During our last update, the vote was too close on Proposition 29 to declare a winner, but as the weeks wore on, it became clear that opponents of the measure could claim victory in what became one of the narrowest defeats of a statewide ballot measure in California's history. You’ll recall that if this initiative had passed, it would have increased the tax on tobacco to pay for cancer research. The vote count was very close, but perhaps in the end proponents couldn’t overcome the huge amounts of money spent by tobacco companies to defeat the measure.

Companies like Philip Morris spent millions of dollars on an advertising campaign against Proposition 29 that likely greatly reduced support, as there were high levels of support several months prior to the election.  It is estimated that Big Tobacco spent nearly $50 million to defeat the measure. The AP notes that “The result was reminiscent a 2006 California cigarette tax measure that led by wide margins in early polling until tobacco companies spent $66 million to defeat it with ads featuring physicians.”

Many supporters of the initiative have suggested they may try again with another ballot measure in the future since the vote count was so close (and turnout was very low this primary).

In response to the loss, Lance Armstrong Foundation President Doug Ulman commented, “The defeat of this life-saving initiative is a genuine tragedy. Big Tobacco lied to voters to protect its profits and spent $50 million to ensure it can continue peddling its deadly products to California kids."

Proposition 8 is back in the news after a federal appeals court refused to reconsider a ruling that struck down the ban on gay marriage. Why is this significant? The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has set up the U.S. Supreme Court to take the case because it has wound its way through the court of appeals and proponents of a ban have aimed all along to get the nation’s high court to offer a decisive ruling on the matter.

Supporters of the ban must petition the high court and at least 4 justices must agree to take on the case. If that occurs, then during the spring of 2013 the case could finally be heard by Supreme Court Justices. Now that the 9th Circuit reaffirmed its ruling that struck down California's Proposition 8, many believe the chances have only increased that the Supreme Court will take on the case, which has been fought in court for years.

The Associated Press reports that “Gay marriage supporters welcomed the latest news in the long-running legal battle. If the Supreme Court refuses to take up the case and lets the appellate ruling stand, same-sex marriages could be legal again in California by the end of the year. ‘The final chapter of the Proposition 8 case has now begun,’ said American Foundation for Equal Rights co-founder Chad Griffin, whose group is funding the effort to overturn the ballot measure. ‘Should the United States Supreme Court decide to review the 9th Circuit’s decision in our case, I am confident that the justices will stand on the side of fairness and equality.’”

The Chronicle has extensive covearge of the case here.

Back in 2010 voters approved Proposition 14 to introduce the "top-two" primary into California’s elections and June’s primary was historic because it marked the first time that the state's legislative and Congressional races were decided by this system. Supporters contend it is a way to get less extreme candidates on the ballot. So how did the primary turn out under the “top-two” method?

For one thing, incumbents had no trouble moving forward, as every single one at least made it to a November runoff. In addition, not a single third-party candidate made it on the November ballot. Another key factor is that during the November election, many voters will have the option of choosing between two Republicans or choosing between two Democrats based on whoever were the leading two vote-getters in June.

The Tribune notes that “In about one-sixth of the state's legislative and Congressional races, either two Democrats or two Republicans will be on the ballot as a result of Tuesday's primary. Democrat will face Democrat in 18 races, and Republican will battle Republican in eight more.”

However, it should be noted that the great majority of California's races will still pit Democrat against Republican -- especially in battleground districts.

The Bee has analysis of the Top-Two Primary here.

And the Tribune has its analysis here.