The FOUNDERS had no problem with limiting the vote to responsible and upstanding members of the Republic.
They didn’t put the right to vote in the Constitution for a REASON
Then I think you and I have a misunderstanding — does the serving of a sentence pay one's debt to society or not?
If it does, then how can you justify retaining abridgement of his rights, privileges, etc? If not, then is it not the sentence itself that is lacking?
(And if the sentence is lacking, why should the convicted suffer for it?)
They didn’t put the right to vote in the Constitution for a REASON
And I have nothing against that — the point is that it was applicable uniformly, this is something quite different.
(Moreover, the States reformed the felony-punishments to alleviate some of the harshness inherited from the British system just after the revolution.)