When it comes to most policy matters, the Post-Gazette has never been accused of walking in lock-step with state Senate Republicans. Even on specific health-related initiatives, we have parted company, particularly on how to expand insurance coverage to more Pennsylvanians.

But on the topic of a potential merger between Pittsburgh's Highmark Inc. and Philadelphia's Independence Blue Cross, we agree that state Insurance Commissioner Joel Ario should say no.

The two health insurers believe the merger, formally proposed in March 2007, is necessary to keep them competitive against multistate, for-profit insurers. It would create one of the nation's largest health insurance providers.

We aren't convinced that the merger would help patients who face escalating costs for premiums or make it easier for employers to negotiate improved coverage for their workers. In addition, given the increases in the state and national unemployment rates, the estimated loss of 1,200 jobs that is expected to result from a merger couldn't come at a worse time.

Members of the state Senate Banking and Insurance Committee expressed similar reservations last week when the panel voted 10-4 against the merger. The House Insurance Committee decided not to take a vote and instead to send comments from individual members to Mr. Ario.

Should Mr. Ario reject the lawmakers' advice -- the vote is only advisory and the decision rests with him -- the Senate committee adopted a second resolution that spelled out 11 conditions that should be part of a merger if it does go forward. Among them: setting up a new arbitration process to settle disputes between doctors and the new insurance provider; restrictions on its leverage with hospital systems; and a prohibition against allowing the new company to convert from nonprofit to for-profit status.

The conditions may prove useful as a fall-back position, but the best course would be for Mr. Ario to reject this massive merger.