Oregon Ballot Measure 97 was a contentious measure on the Oregon 2016 ballot that sought to raise taxes on corporations with sales over 25 million dollars within the state of Oregon. Predictably, there was a considerable amount of lobbying targeting elites and expansive campaigns targeting the public intending to promote or block the measure. Theoretically, this research applies the Narrative Policy Framework to describe these communications in terms of the active narratives within the discourse, assess their effect on the general public and their effect on the Measure 97 election outcome. Methodologically, we leverage qualitative interviews to describe the active narratives; next we assess the potential effects of those same narratives operationalized within a survey experiment administered to an online pool of census‐balanced respondents. We explore our findings through narrative congruence, character affect, and vote switching, as well as in light of the recent election results, where Measure 97 failed to pass. Our models are able to connect narrative effects, public opinion, and policy outcomes via the ballot measure process. We argue that while narrative has discernable effects, it is imperative that future scholarship also consider other factors when examining the role of policy narratives and policy outcomes.