Tyrone Siu/Reuters

The casino magnate Sheldon Adelson and his wife, Miriam, have so far thrown away $11 million on Newt Gingrich’s floundering presidential bid. Adhering, perhaps, to the sunk-cost fallacy that motivates gamblers, they’re now getting ready to throw away some more. Mr. Adelson recently told Forbes magazine that, who knows, he “might give [an additional] $10 million or $100 million to Gingrich”—meaning, presumably, to the super PAC supporting the former speaker, Winning Our Future.

Thanks to Citizens United, unlimited contributions to third-party groups are legal (although super PACs in their current form are probably not legal, since they’re not truly independent). That, of course, is the real scandal—a position that, oddly enough, Mr. Adelson seems to share.



He also told Forbes: “I’m against very wealthy ­people attempting to or influencing elections. But as long as it’s doable I’m going to do it. Because I know that guys like Soros have been doing it for years, if not decades.”

Is that a cry for help? Mr. Adelson needs the government to save him from himself.

The eighth richest person in the United States does not think rich people should have the right to influence elections—but will continue trying to do so, because he can. That’s a great explanation for why the government needs to regulate campaigns and, for that matter, a great explanation for why government regulation is necessary more generally.