If you want to know who to blame for drug price gouging, the CEO's of companies is an odd place to look. Not only is it their job to maximize shareholder value, they are almost always punished severely for not doing so. Especially considering how liquid capital is in today's electronic trading markets, the idea that it is the responsibility of the CEO to be the conscience of the market is more than bit unfair.
The problem in health care and pharma is that we have a system without price controls or bulk purchasing power (thank George W Bush for the latter on that one. More on that later). Health care is not an optional or commodity market precisely because everyone needs it and the cost of entry to the market encourages monopolies as specialized medications cost a huge amount in R&D and clearing regulatory hurdles while enjoying small, but captured markets.
If we are going to use the market mechanism to encourage innovation, we need to protect intellectual property. But doing so also prevents downward price pressure that comes from low priced competitors. So we handle it one of two ways or both. We either set price caps (like most European nations do) or we negotiate lower bulk purchase pricing for insurance companies (like they do in Switzerland) and some insurance companies in the US actually DO purchase EpiPens for less than the retail market rate.
The problem arises when we prevent traditionally large entities like the VA, Tricare, and Medicare Part B from negotiating those lower prices. And yes, that is precisely what George W Bush did. The government had a unique ability to negotiate a lower market rate for drugs like insulin and EpiPens and voluntarily pissed it away. Not only that, it PROHIBITED further administrations from doing so in the future.
It is only a market when both buyers and sellers participate.