What is the difference between a 55-200 mm VR and a 55-300 mm VR DSLR lens?

I'm looking at cameras for my boyfriend and can't decide which to go with - mainly because I don't know much about them. Right now I'm choosing between the Nikon 3100 18-55 mm VR + 55-300 mm VR, and the Nikon D5000 18-55 mm VR + 55-200 mm VR. He isn't by any means a professional photographer, but we're looking for something that will give us a crisp picture and that has a good zoom.

I know that usually the bulk of the cost is concerning which lens you buy. In this case, the cost is only a difference of $150. How much better is the 55-300 than the 55-200? I'm sure its worth the $150, but I'm just wondering what exactly the difference is between these two. I plan to visit a camera shop later this week, but in the mean time I'm just looking for some opinions concerning this.

The D3100 is a reasonably new camera (2010)
The D5000 was released in 2009

You can read a short D3100 V D5000 comparison here>

http://geekyweekly.com/2010/the-new-nikon-d3100-vs-d3000-vs-d5000

Personally I'd rather have the newer camera. The lenses don't really come into the equation as they are all Nikon VR

The numbers tell you the difference. The 300 has 1/3 more reach that the 200.

As far as picture quality as a whole, you are better off with the D3100.it has 14.2 megapixels vs. D5000 12.3 megapixel. The higher the pixel the greater the clarity. The biggest advantage that the D5000 has is the vari-angle monitor. That helps for very high and low shots when unable to look directly at the viewer. Other than that most features are the same and/or alike. If you are going to use it for a lot of videos, than pick the D5000, it has more frames per second.