I don’t understand that table. It looks to me like Hawaii had by far the lowest number (and percentage) of births to nonresident mothers—which makes sense, given how far away it is. Yet the caption seems to be making a point that has nothing to do with the data in the table. Can you clarify?
I took it to mean that Hawaii has made such a point of registering so many non-residents as "resident" births that their stats got screwed up. That there are many "non-resident" births getting reported as "resident" births, which is exactly the situation for which Obama is suspected. In other words, the stat bolsters the assertion of hanky panky going on in the records section of Hawaii state government.