> I think the problem is DL thinks the term non-resident means
> not a resident of the US.
I think that’s his interpretation too, bolstered by that table’s caption’s use of the words “foreign” and “alien”. But that would mean (by that same table) that Idaho had more than 3,000 births to non-US residents in 1961. Does that seem likely?
And I still don’t understand what the table caption is getting at in its final sentence. “Hawaii’s birth rate to non-resident alien parents was surpassed only by Florida”—Hawaii’s birth rate to nonresident parents, by that table, was less than 1%. What are they talking about?
I think the authors of the table have no clue to what the numbers mean. Whether that is deliberate or just incompetent, I don’t know.