Read: The real reason for the retirement crisis

Well, maybe a little. But not enough to get all worked up about.

Here's why.

It's clear from the comments from many ERISA attorneys, investor advocacy groups, as well as insightful industry thoughtleaders (see "New Fiduciary Rule: What the DOL Got Right, Came Close on, and Missed Entirely," FiduciaryNews.com, April 12, 2016), the DOL tried hard to be the best it could be for all interest groups.

Sure, there's that old adage that says if you try to please everyone you end up pleasing no one, but we'll set that thought aside for another day.

Today let us honor those who put forth the effort.

Read: The free market is always one step ahead of regulators

The DOL placed itself between a proverbial rock and a hard place a long, long time ago, well before the current administrators inhabited their desks. Under both Democrat and Republican administrations, the DOL has slowly been building a case for the allowance of self-dealing fees, especially 12b-1 fees.

The first landmark ruling in this matter occurred during the Clinton administration. In 1997, the DOL issued the Frost Advisory Opinion letter. In it, the DOL held that the receipt of 12b-1 fees did not violate sections 406(b)(1) – the prohibition of fiduciary self-dealing – and 406(b)(3) – the prohibition of receipt of third party consideration.

During the second Bush administration, the 2003 AMN-AMBRO Advisory Opinion extended the Frost Advisory Opinion to include revenue sharing arrangements.

It is no surprise, then, since earlier DOL opinions had exempted 12b-1 fees and revenue sharing for self-dealing prohibitions, that today's DOL had little choice but to once again extend that exemption to the third and final leg of self-dealing transactions: commissions.

Over the last five years, the DOL has fought valiantly to protect the interests of retirement savers. It correctly showed that these self-dealing transactions are responsible for losses into the billions of dollars.

Indeed, peer-reviewed academic research confirmed these findings. Proprietary mutual funds and funds containing commissions, 12b-1 fees, and revenue sharing regularly underperform their counterparts.

Today, few ERISA plans use funds with commissions or 12b-1 fees. The reporting is thinner on the use of revenue sharing, mainly because it is much harder to detect.

Despite their best efforts, it was nearly impossible for the current DOL to ignore the legacy Advisory Opinions regarding the allowance of self-dealing. Like Jett Rink (James Dean's character in Giant), self-dealing business models were "too big to kill." All the Thomas Perezes and all the Phyllis Borzis couldn't stuff that particular genie back in the bottle.

And so the DOL did the next best thing. It issued a rule that was consistent with past DOL rulings, but labeled it as "investor protection."

They tried.

In the end, as I said earlier, it doesn't matter. If the rule survives the inevitably political standoff, brokers will continue to charge the same fees they've always charged, (albeit by jumping through a few incidental hoops).

If some future administration rescinds the Rule before it can become effective, brokers will continue to charge the same fees they've always charged (without the need for hoops).

It's been said one cannot regulate (or legislate) morality. That's because sin pays much higher wages.