It should be noted that the 41% is not all corn for human consumption, in fact likely a small percentage of it is. But the result is the same -- if it's going to fuel instead of cattle, we still pay increased food prices based on the increased feed prices.
I'm not sure I buy the 2nd and 3rd gen stuff. You still need the land to grow your alternate cellulose, and every acre of land set aside for that is an acre less of food growing land. I can't believe there's enough cellulose-based "waste" to fuel (pardon the pun) a national ethanol industry.
My original theory regarding ethanol is much the same as my solar theory. They are both good alternate energies for individual or local use (e.g., "getting off the grid"), but they are crappy alternatives for large, commercial distribution infrastructures.