Regarding Aspirin, Penicillin, et al, many of those drugs are the low hanging fruit in pharmacology. We've already plundered many of the easy molecules. I would contest that many of the present-day pharmaceutical assumptions are predicated on the fact that the easy molecules have already been found.
The reason many drugs fail is not because clinical trials are too long - its because the drugs themselves prove ineffective, unsafe or both. Is a 2% increase in survival rate worth a 20% increase in mortality due to complications and side effects?
We are past the days that you can find compounds that mold poops out, and use it to cure 90% of humanity's ailments.
I certainly agree that clinical trial regulations are too long, with too much bureaucracy. They could stand to be shortened considerably. BUT, they also exist for a reason - safety is important.
Also consider the safety of the patient. Cancer patients are usually willing to try anything to avoid dieing of cancer. There needs to be some protection such that these people are not unduly taken advantage of.
There is a fine moral line between allowing people to take risky drugs to cure their disease and allowing companies to treat cancer patients as expendable hamsters.
*Side note: I am no fan of big pharma either. They are effectively marketing firms that sell pills, not research companies (anymore). But that is not really what we are discussing at present =)